Screener
FFTY vs IWO
CapForce IBD 50 ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
Key differences
- IWO costs 0.56% less per year.
- IWO is significantly larger than FFTY — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, FFTY has delivered higher annualized returns.
- IWO has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| FFTY | IWO | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.80% | 0.24% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $88M | $13.9B |
| Since | 2015 | 2000 |
| Dividend yield | 1.23% | 0.42% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +39.8% | +43.1% |
| CAGR 3Y | +21.6% | +19.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | -0.1% | +6.5% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.69 | 0.75 |
| Volatility 1Y | 34.09% | 21.41% |
| Max drawdown | -59.46% | -42.01% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to FFTY and IWO
Explore further