WOOD vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

WOOD (iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - WOOD is a Materials fund tracking the S&P Global Timber & Forestry Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, WOOD returned 5.20%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for IWM. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WOOD charges 0.46%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

WOOD vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WOOD achieves a -6.95% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return. Over the past 10 years, WOOD has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 5.20%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.93% annualized return.

WOOD

• 1D: -0.73%
• 1M: -0.81%
• YTD: -6.95%
• 6M: -3.23%
• 1Y: -6.85%
• 3Y*: -0.20%
• 5Y*: -3.93%
• 10Y*: 5.20%

IWM

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: 3.52%
• YTD: 17.07%
• 6M: 15.83%
• 1Y: 39.10%
• 3Y*: 17.88%
• 5Y*: 6.11%
• 10Y*: 10.93%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WOOD vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
WOOD iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF	-6.95%	-3.27%	-4.21%	13.84%	-19.39%	17.03%	20.36%	19.75%	-17.73%	34.49%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	17.07%	12.66%	11.38%	16.83%	-20.48%	14.54%	20.03%	25.39%	-11.12%	14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between WOOD and IWM is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2008	0.72

The correlation between WOOD and IWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.56 (1 year) to 0.72 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

WOOD vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WOOD	IWM
Basic Materials	63.6%	4.5%
Consumer Cyclical	23.5%	7.8%
Real Estate	12.9%	5.7%
Communication Services	-	2.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.1%
Energy	-	6.0%
Financial Services	-	15.8%
Healthcare	-	15.8%
Industrials	-	17.1%
Technology	-	19.5%
Utilities	-	3.0%

Return for Risk

WOOD vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

WOOD

WOOD Risk / Return Rank: 5
WOOD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
WOOD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
WOOD Omega Ratio Rank: 5
WOOD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
WOOD Martin Ratio Rank: 5

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 62
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

WOOD vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) 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.

	WOOD	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.37	2.05	-2.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.40	2.85	-3.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.34	-0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.32	3.56	-3.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.74	12.64	-13.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WOOD vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WOOD Sharpe Ratio is -0.37, which is lower than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WOOD 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	WOOD	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.37	2.05	-2.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.20	0.27	-0.47
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.24	0.48	-0.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.15	0.37	-0.21

Drawdowns

WOOD vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WOOD drawdown since its inception was -63.25%, which is greater than IWM's maximum drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WOOD and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	WOOD	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.25%	-59.05%	-4.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.64%	-11.03%	-10.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.79%	-27.50%	+4.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.71%	-31.91%	+1.20%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-50.20%	-41.13%	-9.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.31%	-1.49%	-22.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.76%	-10.77%	-3.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.27%	3.10%	+6.17%

Volatility

WOOD vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) have volatilities of 5.70% and 5.75%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	WOOD	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.70%	5.75%	-0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.96%	13.53%	+0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.70%	19.20%	-0.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.72%	22.52%	-2.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.87%	23.04%	-1.17%

WOOD vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

WOOD has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

WOOD vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

WOOD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	0.88%	1.04%	1.15%	1.35%	1.48%	0.94%	1.04%	1.26%	1.40%	1.26%	1.38%	1.54%
WOOD iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF	2.69%	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

Can I hold both WOOD and IWM in my portfolio?

WOOD and IWM have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WOOD or IWM?

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to WOOD (5.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WOOD dropped -63.25% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, WOOD or IWM?

On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.93% vs 5.20% for WOOD. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WOOD or IWM?

Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.93% return vs 5.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WOOD or IWM?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.46% for WOOD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WOOD or IWM?

WOOD has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

What is the main difference between WOOD and IWM?

WOOD is categorized as Materials, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. WOOD tracks S&P Global Timber & Forestry Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for WOOD and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs -0.37), 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.