PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VRNIX vs. IWL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VRNIX vs. IWL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Russell 1000 Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRNIX) and iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with VRNIX having a 10.55% return and IWL slightly lower at 10.51%. Over the past 10 years, VRNIX has underperformed IWL with an annualized return of 15.43%, while IWL has yielded a comparatively higher 16.38% annualized return.


VRNIX

1D
-0.74%
1M
4.10%
YTD
10.55%
6M
10.37%
1Y
27.08%
3Y*
21.99%
5Y*
13.41%
10Y*
15.43%

IWL

1D
0.44%
1M
4.89%
YTD
10.51%
6M
10.48%
1Y
28.95%
3Y*
23.64%
5Y*
14.69%
10Y*
16.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VRNIX vs. IWL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
VRNIX
Vanguard Russell 1000 Index Fund Institutional Shares
10.55%16.94%24.44%26.49%-19.19%28.64%20.90%31.36%-4.84%21.58%
IWL
iShares Russell Top 200 ETF
10.51%19.09%27.12%29.77%-19.89%27.79%22.10%31.42%-3.30%22.90%

Correlation

The correlation between VRNIX and IWL is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.98

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

0.98

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

0.99

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2010

0.95

The correlation between VRNIX and IWL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

VRNIX vs. IWL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

VRNIX
VRNIX Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
VRNIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VRNIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
VRNIX Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
VRNIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
VRNIX Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank

IWL
IWL Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
IWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWL Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
IWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWL Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

VRNIX vs. IWL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Russell 1000 Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRNIX) and iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL). 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.


VRNIXIWLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.43

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.08

2.96

+0.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.21

13.13

+1.08

VRNIX vs. IWL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VRNIX Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is comparable to the IWL Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VRNIX and IWL, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


VRNIXIWLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.27

2.39

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.78

0.86

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

0.91

-0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

0.88

-0.03

Drawdowns

VRNIX vs. IWL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VRNIX drawdown since its inception was -34.57%, which is greater than IWL's maximum drawdown of -32.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VRNIX and IWL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VRNIXIWLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.57%

-32.71%

-1.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.85%

-9.83%

+0.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.40%

-19.15%

-0.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.14%

-25.65%

+0.51%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.57%

-32.71%

-1.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.74%

-0.39%

-0.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.90%

-3.88%

-0.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.91%

2.21%

-0.30%

Volatility

VRNIX vs. IWL - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Russell 1000 Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRNIX) and iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) have volatilities of 2.95% and 2.95%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VRNIXIWLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.95%

2.95%

0.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.04%

9.15%

-0.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.99%

12.19%

-0.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.25%

17.16%

+0.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.27%

18.08%

+0.19%

VRNIX vs. IWL - Expense Ratio Comparison

VRNIX has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than IWL's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

VRNIX vs. IWL - Dividend Comparison

VRNIX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, more than IWL's 0.82% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWL
iShares Russell Top 200 ETF
0.82%0.90%1.04%1.30%1.54%1.12%1.30%1.96%1.93%1.69%1.96%2.14%
VRNIX
Vanguard Russell 1000 Index Fund Institutional Shares
1.00%0.82%1.21%1.41%1.59%2.86%1.46%1.65%2.00%1.73%1.93%1.92%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.98, VRNIX and IWL move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

IWL has higher volatility (2.95%) compared to VRNIX (2.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VRNIX dropped -34.57% vs IWL's -32.71%.

IWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 2.27), 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 VRNIX and IWL

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