Screener
MFSV vs IWN
MFS Active Value ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF
Key differences
- IWN costs 0.20% less per year.
- IWN is significantly larger than MFSV — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- MFSV follows a active selection strategy; IWN uses index tracking.
- IWN has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| MFSV | IWN | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.44% | 0.24% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $443M | $13.4B |
| Since | 2024 | 2000 |
| Dividend yield | 1.49% | 1.49% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +14.6% | +43.7% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +18.7% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +6.9% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.77 |
| Volatility 1Y | 10.34% | 17.87% |
| Max drawdown | -12.74% | -46.08% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to MFSV and IWN
Explore further