Screener
IWB vs URTH
iShares Russell 1000 ETF vs iShares MSCI World ETF
Key differences
- IWB costs 0.09% less per year.
- IWB is significantly larger than URTH — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- IWB covers north america markets; URTH covers global.
- Over the last 3 years, IWB has delivered higher annualized returns.
- IWB has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| IWB | URTH | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.15% | 0.24% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $46.2B | $9.2B |
| Since | 2000 | 2012 |
| Dividend yield | 0.96% | 1.40% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | global |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +28.3% | +27.3% |
| CAGR 3Y | +22.8% | +21.2% |
| CAGR 5Y | +13.1% | +12.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.21 | 1.17 |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.07% | 12.16% |
| Max drawdown | -34.60% | -34.01% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to IWB and URTH
Explore further