Screener
FDRS vs IWM
Corgi ETF Trust I vs iShares Russell 2000 ETF
Key differences
- IWM costs 0.30% less per year.
- IWM is significantly larger than FDRS — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- FDRS is classified as alternative, while IWM is equity — different risk/return profiles.
- FDRS follows a leveraged strategy; IWM uses index tracking.
- IWM has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| FDRS | IWM | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.49% | 0.19% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $77M | $76.9B |
| Since | 2025 | 2000 |
| Dividend yield | — | 0.91% |
| Asset class | alternative | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | leveraged | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +44.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +19.6% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +7.2% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.78 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 19.29% |
| Max drawdown | -21.64% | -41.13% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to FDRS and IWM
Explore further