Screener
IWB vs RSSL
iShares Russell 1000 ETF vs Global X Russell 2000 ETF
Key differences
- RSSL costs 0.07% less per year.
- IWB is significantly larger than RSSL — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- IWB has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| IWB | RSSL | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.15% | 0.08% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $46.2B | $1.4B |
| Since | 2000 | 2024 |
| Dividend yield | 0.96% | 1.33% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +28.3% | +41.8% |
| CAGR 3Y | +22.8% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | +13.1% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.21 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.07% | 19.19% |
| Max drawdown | -34.60% | -27.79% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to IWB and RSSL
Explore further