VTWO vs. IXG
VTWO (Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF) and IXG (iShares Global Financials ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VTWO is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while IXG is a Financials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Financials Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, VTWO returned 11.41%/yr vs 12.87%/yr for IXG. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. VTWO charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for IXG.
Performance
VTWO vs. IXG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, VTWO achieves a 19.26% return, which is significantly higher than IXG's 3.78% return. Over the past 10 years, VTWO has underperformed IXG with an annualized return of 11.41%, while IXG has yielded a comparatively higher 12.87% annualized return.
VTWO
- 1D
- 0.86%
- 1M
- 5.50%
- YTD
- 19.26%
- 6M
- 16.09%
- 1Y
- 42.05%
- 3Y*
- 17.46%
- 5Y*
- 6.23%
- 10Y*
- 11.41%
IXG
- 1D
- 1.28%
- 1M
- 4.62%
- YTD
- 3.78%
- 6M
- 4.96%
- 1Y
- 19.03%
- 3Y*
- 23.67%
- 5Y*
- 12.27%
- 10Y*
- 12.87%
VTWO vs. IXG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VTWO Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF | 19.26% | 12.90% | 11.55% | 17.08% | -20.49% | 14.79% | 20.22% | 25.81% | -11.15% | 14.69% |
IXG iShares Global Financials ETF | 3.78% | 28.54% | 25.69% | 14.97% | -8.97% | 25.07% | -2.99% | 24.60% | -16.33% | 23.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between VTWO and IXG is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2010 | 0.77 |
The correlation between VTWO and IXG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.
VTWO vs. IXG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
VTWO
IXG
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
-
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
VTWO
IXG
Technology
VTWO
IXG
Healthcare
VTWO
IXG
Financial Services
VTWO
IXG
Consumer Cyclical
VTWO
IXG
Real Estate
VTWO
IXG
-
Energy
VTWO
IXG
Basic Materials
VTWO
IXG
-
Utilities
VTWO
IXG
-
Communication Services
VTWO
IXG
-
Consumer Defensive
VTWO
IXG
-
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
VTWO vs. IXG — Risk / Return Rank
VTWO
IXG
VTWO vs. IXG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO) and iShares Global Financials ETF (IXG). 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.
| VTWO | IXG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.99 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.21 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.61 | 1.49 | +2.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.79 | 5.26 | +7.53 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
VTWO vs. IXG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum VTWO drawdown since its inception was -41.19%, smaller than the maximum IXG drawdown of -78.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VTWO and IXG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| VTWO | IXG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.19% | -78.42% | +37.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.99% | -11.33% | +0.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.57% | -13.54% | -14.03% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.88% | -27.20% | -4.68% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.19% | -43.47% | +2.28% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.38% | -19.73% | +11.35% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.10% | 3.21% | -0.11% |
Volatility
VTWO vs. IXG - Volatility Comparison
Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO) has a higher volatility of 7.15% compared to iShares Global Financials ETF (IXG) at 4.30%. This indicates that VTWO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IXG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| VTWO | IXG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.15% | 4.30% | +2.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.26% | 11.30% | +2.96% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.66% | 14.01% | +5.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.57% | 17.38% | +5.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.13% | 20.12% | +3.01% |
VTWO vs. IXG - Expense Ratio Comparison
VTWO has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than IXG's 0.46% expense ratio.
Dividends
VTWO vs. IXG - Dividend Comparison
VTWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, less than IXG's 1.97% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IXG iShares Global Financials ETF | 1.97% | 2.04% | 2.64% | 2.62% | 3.71% | 1.69% | 2.13% | 2.87% | 3.14% | 2.12% | 2.21% | 2.79% |
VTWO Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF | 1.06% | 1.25% | 1.21% | 1.45% | 1.48% | 1.13% | 0.92% | 1.36% | 1.41% | 1.18% | 1.27% | 1.23% |
Frequently Asked Questions
VTWO and IXG have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
VTWO has higher volatility (7.15%) compared to IXG (4.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VTWO dropped -41.19% vs IXG's -78.42%.
On 10-year performance, IXG leads with 12.87% vs 11.41% for VTWO. On fees, VTWO is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, IXG has been the lower-risk option at 4.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IXG has performed better with a 12.87% return vs 11.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VTWO is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.46% for IXG.
IXG has the higher dividend yield at 1.97%, compared with 1.06% for VTWO.
VTWO is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while IXG is Financials Equities. VTWO tracks Russell 2000 Index, while IXG tracks S&P Global Financials Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for VTWO and 0.46% for IXG.
VTWO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.20), 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.
Find the right allocation for VTWO and IXG
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