WOOD vs. CUT
WOOD (iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF) and CUT (Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF) are both Materials funds - WOOD tracks the S&P Global Timber & Forestry Index while CUT tracks the Beacon Global Timber Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, WOOD returned 5.69%/yr vs 4.22%/yr for CUT. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. WOOD charges 0.46%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CUT.
Performance
WOOD vs. CUT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, WOOD achieves a -5.06% return, which is significantly lower than CUT's -3.54% return. Over the past 10 years, WOOD has outperformed CUT with an annualized return of 5.69%, while CUT has yielded a comparatively lower 4.22% annualized return.
WOOD
- 1D
- 1.94%
- 1M
- 0.42%
- 6M
- -9.58%
- YTD
- -5.06%
- 1Y
- -7.46%
- 3Y*
- -0.50%
- 5Y*
- -3.65%
- 10Y*
- 5.69%
CUT
- 1D
- 1.49%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- 6M
- -7.74%
- YTD
- -3.54%
- 1Y
- -7.67%
- 3Y*
- 0.48%
- 5Y*
- -3.66%
- 10Y*
- 4.22%
WOOD vs. CUT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WOOD iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF | -5.06% | -3.27% | -4.21% | 13.84% | -19.39% | 17.03% | 20.36% | 19.75% | -17.73% | 34.49% |
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | -3.54% | -5.92% | 1.82% | 8.65% | -16.38% | 12.29% | 18.05% | 23.35% | -21.70% | 30.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between WOOD and CUT is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008 | 0.91 |
The correlation between WOOD and CUT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
WOOD vs. CUT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
WOOD
CUT
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
WOOD
CUT
Consumer Cyclical
WOOD
CUT
Real Estate
WOOD
CUT
Communication Services
WOOD
-
CUT
-
Consumer Defensive
WOOD
-
CUT
Energy
WOOD
-
CUT
-
Financial Services
WOOD
-
CUT
Healthcare
WOOD
-
CUT
-
Industrials
WOOD
-
CUT
Technology
WOOD
-
CUT
Utilities
WOOD
-
CUT
-
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
WOOD vs. CUT — Risk / Return Rank
WOOD
CUT
WOOD vs. CUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) and Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT). 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.
| WOOD | CUT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 0.94 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.37 | -0.45 | +0.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.73 | -0.87 | +0.14 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
WOOD vs. CUT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum WOOD drawdown since its inception was -63.25%, smaller than the maximum CUT drawdown of -70.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WOOD and CUT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| WOOD | CUT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.25% | -70.03% | +6.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.64% | -19.62% | -2.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.79% | -22.23% | -0.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.71% | -30.40% | -0.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -50.20% | -45.76% | -4.44% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.77% | -21.33% | -1.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.81% | -15.29% | +0.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.88% | 10.06% | +0.82% |
Volatility
WOOD vs. CUT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) is 5.61%, while Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) has a volatility of 6.02%. This indicates that WOOD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CUT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| WOOD | CUT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.61% | 6.02% | -0.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.57% | 14.70% | -0.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.67% | 18.75% | -0.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.74% | 18.56% | +1.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.70% | 20.05% | +1.65% |
WOOD vs. CUT - Expense Ratio Comparison
WOOD has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than CUT's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
WOOD vs. CUT - Dividend Comparison
WOOD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.49%, less than CUT's 2.55% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | 2.55% | 2.46% | 3.05% | 2.44% | 2.58% | 1.57% | 1.65% | 2.67% | 3.43% | 1.57% | 2.08% | 1.52% |
WOOD iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF | 2.49% | 2.51% | 2.09% | 1.64% | 2.26% | 1.24% | 0.98% | 1.85% | 2.82% | 1.19% | 1.65% | 2.04% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, WOOD and CUT 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.
CUT has higher volatility (6.02%) compared to WOOD (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WOOD dropped -63.25% vs CUT's -70.03%.
On 10-year performance, WOOD leads with 5.69% vs 4.22% for CUT. On fees, WOOD is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, WOOD has been the lower-risk option at 5.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, WOOD has performed better with a 5.69% return vs 4.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
WOOD is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CUT.
CUT has the higher dividend yield at 2.55%, compared with 2.49% for WOOD.
WOOD tracks S&P Global Timber & Forestry Index, while CUT tracks Beacon Global Timber Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for WOOD and 0.55% for CUT.
WOOD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.42 vs -0.47), 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 WOOD and CUT
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