XOP vs IWM: Complete Comparison

SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Exploration ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 ETF โ€” overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis

Holdings Overlap
1.61%
Very Low Overlap
Shared Holdings
27 of 52
Complete portfolio analysis
Calculation Method
Min Weight
Weighted intersection

Visual Overlap

XOP
IWM
1.6%
XOP Only
Overlap
IWM Only

Price Performance

Historical price comparison over 3M

XOP Return
+28.01%
IWM Return
+9.61%
Winner
XOP
+18.40%
Max Drawdown
XOP: -15.1%
IWM: -11.0%
XOP Volatility (annualized)32.28%
IWM Volatility (annualized)20.95%

๐Ÿ“ˆ Comparison

Metric
XOP
IWM
1 Year Return
+5.5%
+18.5%โœ“
3 Year Return
+22.5%โœ“
+4.2%
5 Year Return
+12.8%โœ“
+10.5%
Volatility
38.50%
24.80%โœ“
Expense Ratio
0.35%
0.19%โœ“
โš ๏ธ Past performance does not guarantee future results. Data may be delayed.

โš ๏ธRisk Metrics

Metric
XOP
IWM
Volatility
38.50%
24.80%โœ“
Sharpe Ratio
0.28
0.38โœ“
Sortino Ratio
0.35
0.52โœ“
Max Drawdown
-72.50%
-41.50%โœ“
Beta
1.52
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

3 - 14

๐Ÿ† IWM wins this comparison

Key Factors

๐Ÿ’ฐ Expense Ratio
XOP:0.35%โœ“
vs
IWM:0.19%โœ“
๐ŸŽฏ Number of Holdings
XOP:55 holdingsโœ“
vs
IWM:1,983 holdingsโœ“
๐Ÿ“ˆ 5-Year Return
XOP:+12.8%โœ“
vs
IWM:+10.5%โœ“
โ–ถAdditional Metrics (5)
โš–๏ธ Concentration Risk
XOP: 29.7% in top 10
IWM: 5.3% in top 10โœ“
๐Ÿ“Š Assets Under Management
XOP: $4B
IWM: $60B โœ“โœ“
โšก Sharpe Ratio
XOP: 0.28
IWM: 0.38
๐Ÿ“‰ Volatility
XOP: 38.5%
IWM: 24.8%โœ“
๐Ÿ” Uniqueness vs SPY
XOP: 97.8% unique
IWM: 100.0% uniqueโœ“

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

Detailed Overlap Analysis

27 shared holdings representing 1.6% portfolio overlap

Top Shared Holdings

#StockXOP WeightIWM WeightOverlap
1
CNX
CNX
3.37%0.19%0.19%
2
MUR
MUR
3.15%0.15%0.15%
3
MGY
MGY
2.49%0.15%0.15%
4
GPOR
GPOR
3.00%0.11%0.11%
5
CRC
CRC
2.01%0.11%0.11%
6
PBF
PBF
2.49%0.09%0.09%
7
NOG
NOG
1.95%0.08%0.08%
8
SM
SM
1.78%0.08%0.08%
9
PARR
PARR
2.16%0.07%0.07%
10
DK
DK
1.94%0.07%0.07%

Overlap by Sector

Other
27 stocks ยท 1.61% overlap

Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution

27
Shared Stocks
1.6%
Total Overlap
1
Sectors Represented

Top Holdings Only in XOP

Unique to XOP

โ†Scroll horizontally to see all dataโ†’
SymbolNameWeight
EXEEXE3.17%
EQTEQT2.92%
VLOVLO2.89%
RRCRRC2.86%
CTRACTRA2.79%

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.

Want deeper analysis on XOP or IWM?

Complement your EigenDex analysis with these research tools.

Some links may be affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support EigenDex as a free tool. We only recommend tools we believe provide genuine value to investors.

Compare More ETFs