IEMG vs IWM: Complete Comparison

iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 ETF โ€” overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis

Holdings Overlap
0.10%
Very Low Overlap
Shared Holdings
2 of 31
Complete portfolio analysis
Calculation Method
Min Weight
Weighted intersection

Visual Overlap

IEMG
IWM
0.1%
IEMG Only
Overlap
IWM Only

Price Performance

Historical price comparison over 3M

IEMG Return
+9.85%
IWM Return
+12.41%
Winner
IWM
+2.56%
Max Drawdown
IEMG: -5.2%
IWM: -8.5%
IEMG Volatility (annualized)13.77%
IWM Volatility (annualized)19.30%

๐Ÿ“ˆ Comparison

Metric
IEMG
IWM
1 Year Return
+14.2%
+18.5%โœ“
3 Year Return
+2.2%
+4.2%โœ“
5 Year Return
+5.8%
+10.5%โœ“
Volatility
21.80%โœ“
24.80%
Expense Ratio
0.09%โœ“
0.19%
โš ๏ธ Past performance does not guarantee future results. Data may be delayed.

โš ๏ธRisk Metrics

Metric
IEMG
IWM
Volatility
21.80%โœ“
24.80%
Sharpe Ratio
0.22
0.38โœ“
Sortino Ratio
0.28
0.52โœ“
Max Drawdown
-50.50%
-41.50%โœ“
Beta
0.92
1.25

Interpretation:

  • ๐Ÿ“Š Lower volatility = smoother ride
  • โšก Higher Sharpe/Sortino = better risk-adjusted returns
  • โš ๏ธ Smaller max drawdown = less worst-case pain
  • ๐Ÿ“ˆ Beta > 1 = more volatile than S&P 500

โš”๏ธ Comparison

6 - 5

๐Ÿ† IEMG wins this comparison

Key Factors

๐Ÿ’ฐ Expense Ratio
IEMG:0.09%โœ“
vs
IWM:0.19%โœ“
๐ŸŽฏ Number of Holdings
IEMG:2,679 holdingsโœ“
vs
IWM:1,983 holdingsโœ“
๐Ÿ“ˆ 5-Year Return
IEMG:+5.8%โœ“
vs
IWM:+10.5%โœ“
โ–ถAdditional Metrics (5)
โš–๏ธ Concentration Risk
IEMG: 2.3% in top 10
IWM: 5.3% in top 10
๐Ÿ“Š Assets Under Management
IEMG: $85B โœ“
IWM: $60B โœ“
โšก Sharpe Ratio
IEMG: 0.22
IWM: 0.38โœ“
๐Ÿ“‰ Volatility
IEMG: 21.8%
IWM: 24.8%
๐Ÿ” Uniqueness vs SPY
IEMG: 100.0% unique
IWM: 100.0% unique

Bottom line: IEMG wins with better expense ratio and number of holdings. Consider IEMG for your portfolio, but IWM is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.

Detailed Overlap Analysis

2 shared holdings representing 0.1% portfolio overlap

Top Shared Holdings

#StockIEMG WeightIWM WeightOverlap
1
PAGS
PAGS
0.02%0.06%0.02%
2
PAX
PAX
0.01%0.04%0.01%

Overlap by Sector

Other
2 stocks ยท 0.03% overlap

Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution

2
Shared Stocks
0.1%
Total Overlap
1
Sectors Represented

Top Holdings Only in IEMG

Unique to IEMG

โ†Scroll horizontally to see all dataโ†’
SymbolNameWeight
PDDPDD0.80%
NUNU0.45%
AUAU0.33%
BAPBAP0.15%
YUMCYUMC0.14%

Top Holdings Only in IWM

Unique to IWM

โ†Scroll horizontally to see all dataโ†’
SymbolNameWeight
CRDOCREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP HOLDING LTD0.86%
BEBLOOM ENERGY CLASS A CORP0.80%
FNFABRINET0.62%
IONQIONQ INC0.51%
NXTNEXTPOWER INC CLASS A0.44%

Price Correlation

How We Calculate Overlap

We use the minimum weight method with normalization to calculate portfolio overlap:

Overlap = ฮฃ min(weightA, weightB) for each shared holding

Normalization: Holdings weights are normalized to sum to 100% before comparison. This ensures accurate overlap calculations even when analyzing partial holdings data (e.g., top 50 positions).

Conservative approach: We consider only the smaller allocation for each shared position, giving you a realistic view of true portfolio overlap.

๐Ÿ“Š This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.

Compare More ETFs