XJR vs. IWM
XJR (iShares ESG Screened S&P Small-Cap ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds from iShares - XJR tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Sustainability Screened Index while IWM tracks the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XJR returned 5.38%/yr vs 6.11%/yr for IWM. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. XJR charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
XJR vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XJR achieves a 14.91% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return.
XJR
- 1D
- -0.96%
- 1M
- 2.16%
- YTD
- 14.91%
- 6M
- 13.91%
- 1Y
- 28.36%
- 3Y*
- 14.13%
- 5Y*
- 5.38%
- 10Y*
- —
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%
XJR vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XJR iShares ESG Screened S&P Small-Cap ETF | 14.91% | 4.73% | 9.59% | 16.39% | -17.30% | 24.96% | 35.61% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 17.07% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 36.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between XJR and IWM is 0.92, 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 | 0.92 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2020 | 0.95 |
The correlation between XJR and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
XJR vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XJR
IWM
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Utilities
Financial Services
XJR
IWM
Technology
XJR
IWM
Industrials
XJR
IWM
Consumer Cyclical
XJR
IWM
Healthcare
XJR
IWM
Real Estate
XJR
IWM
Energy
XJR
IWM
Basic Materials
XJR
IWM
Consumer Defensive
XJR
IWM
Communication Services
XJR
IWM
Utilities
XJR
IWM
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
XJR vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
XJR
IWM
XJR vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Screened S&P Small-Cap ETF (XJR) 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.
| XJR | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.60 | 2.05 | -0.45 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.36 | 2.85 | -0.49 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.34 | -0.06 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.02 | 3.56 | -0.54 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.70 | 12.64 | -2.94 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XJR | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.60 | 2.05 | -0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.25 | 0.27 | -0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.67 | 0.37 | +0.30 |
Drawdowns
XJR vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XJR drawdown since its inception was -27.14%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XJR and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XJR | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.14% | -59.05% | +31.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.43% | -11.03% | +1.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.14% | -27.50% | +0.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.14% | -31.91% | +4.77% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.13% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.96% | -1.49% | +0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.48% | -10.77% | +1.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.93% | 3.10% | -0.17% |
Volatility
XJR vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares ESG Screened S&P Small-Cap ETF (XJR) is 4.77%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that XJR 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
| XJR | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.77% | 5.75% | -0.98% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.22% | 13.53% | -1.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.85% | 19.20% | -1.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.43% | 22.52% | -1.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.73% | 23.04% | -1.31% |
XJR vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
XJR has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than IWM's 0.19% 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
XJR vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
XJR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, 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% |
XJR iShares ESG Screened S&P Small-Cap ETF | 0.99% | 1.14% | 1.96% | 0.92% | 1.29% | 2.00% | 0.58% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.92, XJR and IWM 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.
IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to XJR (4.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XJR dropped -27.14% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 5-year performance, IWM leads with 6.11% vs 5.38% for XJR. On fees, XJR is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, XJR has been the lower-risk option at 4.77%. 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 6.11% return vs 5.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XJR is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.
XJR has the higher dividend yield at 0.99%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.
XJR tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Sustainability Screened Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for XJR and 0.19% for IWM.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.60), 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 XJR 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