PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
VRIG vs. IWM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

VRIG vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

VRIG (Invesco Variable Rate Investment Grade ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VRIG is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Invesco, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. VRIG is actively managed, while IWM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, VRIG returned 4.44%/yr vs 6.07%/yr for IWM. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. VRIG charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

VRIG vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Variable Rate Investment Grade ETF (VRIG) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VRIG achieves a 1.91% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 19.22% return.

VRIG

1D
0.04%
1M
0.31%
YTD
1.91%
6M
2.18%
1Y
4.93%
3Y*
5.94%
5Y*
4.44%
10Y*
—

IWM

1D
0.87%
1M
3.64%
YTD
19.22%
6M
16.00%
1Y
39.16%
3Y*
17.23%
5Y*
6.07%
10Y*
11.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VRIG vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
VRIG
Invesco Variable Rate Investment Grade ETF		1.91%5.05%6.81%7.37%0.99%1.06%1.76%4.57%0.51%3.20%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		19.22%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between VRIG and IWM is 0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.07

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.11

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2016

0.10

VRIG vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
VRIG
IWM

Financial Services

23.3%
15.6%

Consumer Cyclical

3.0%
7.9%

Basic Materials

0.8%
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

0.7%
2.1%

Technology

0.4%
19.5%

Real Estate

0.3%
5.6%

Utilities

0.1%
3.0%

Industrials

0.0%
17.2%

Communication Services

-

2.1%

Energy

-

5.8%

Healthcare

-

16.1%

Financial Services

VRIG
23.3%
IWM
15.6%

Consumer Cyclical

VRIG
3.0%
IWM
7.9%

Basic Materials

VRIG
0.8%
IWM
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

VRIG
0.7%
IWM
2.1%

Technology

VRIG
0.4%
IWM
19.5%

Real Estate

VRIG
0.3%
IWM
5.6%

Utilities

VRIG
0.1%
IWM
3.0%

Industrials

VRIG
0.0%
IWM
17.2%

Communication Services

VRIG

-

IWM
2.1%

Energy

VRIG

-

IWM
5.8%

Healthcare

VRIG

-

IWM
16.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco Variable Rate Investment Grade ETF

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Often compared with VRIG:
VRIG vs. FLTRVRIG vs. SGOVVRIG vs. TFLOVRIG vs. LQDHVRIG vs. EMNTVRIG vs. FEMBVRIG vs. MBSD
Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. TNA

Return for Risk

VRIG vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
VRIG
VRIG Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
VRIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VRIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
VRIG Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
VRIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
VRIG Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank
IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

VRIG vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Variable Rate Investment Grade ETF (VRIG) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

VRIGIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
10.00
1.99

+8.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
24.17
2.75

+21.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

5.25

1.33

+3.92

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

61.96

3.57

+58.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

315.58

12.63

+302.95

VRIG vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VRIG Sharpe Ratio is 10.00, which is higher than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VRIG and IWM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

VRIG vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VRIG drawdown since its inception was -13.04%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VRIG and IWM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

VRIGIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.04%

-59.05%

+46.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.08%

-11.03%

+10.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.78%

-27.50%

+26.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-2.28%

-31.91%

+29.63%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-41.13%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.27%

-10.76%

+10.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.02%

3.12%

-3.10%

Volatility

VRIG vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Variable Rate Investment Grade ETF (VRIG) is 0.10%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 7.16%. This indicates that VRIG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

VRIGIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.10%

7.16%

-7.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.35%

14.29%

-13.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.50%

19.73%

-19.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.29%

22.61%

-21.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.79%

23.08%

-19.29%

VRIG vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

VRIG has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

VRIG vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

VRIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.79%, more than IWM's 0.87% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		0.87%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%
VRIG
Invesco Variable Rate Investment Grade ETF		4.79%4.99%6.09%5.97%2.39%0.78%1.57%3.12%2.89%2.31%0.60%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

VRIG and IWM have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWM has higher volatility (7.16%) compared to VRIG (0.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VRIG dropped -13.04% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 5-year performance, IWM leads with 6.07% vs 4.44% for VRIG. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, VRIG has been the lower-risk option at 0.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWM has performed better with a 6.07% return vs 4.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for VRIG.

VRIG has the higher dividend yield at 4.79%, compared with 0.87% for IWM.

VRIG is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for VRIG and 0.19% for IWM.

VRIG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (10.00 vs 1.99), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for VRIG and IWM

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer