BC vs IWM: Correlation
Measured on weekly returns over the past three years, Brunswick Corporation (BC) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) carry a correlation of 0.76, a strong link.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are BC and IWM?
Over the past 3 years, BC and IWM moved with a correlation of 0.76, which is strong. Recent behaviour matches the longer record: 0.73 over 1 year against 0.76 over 3. Over 5 years the correlation is 0.73, and the annualized covariance of weekly returns is 537.9 %².
IWM is one of the assets that tracks BC most closely: it ranks #2 out of the 58 assets we track against BC. Over the last 12 months IWM came out ahead by 6.7 percentage points (+21.7% against +28.4%). Risk is not evenly split, since BC carries 1.8 times the volatility of the other side.
How is this computed?
Pearson correlation on weekly returns: ρ(A,B) = cov(rA, rB) / (σA · σB), over windows of 52, 156 and 260 weeks. Covariance is annualized (×52) and expressed in %². Full definitions on the methodology page.
BC vs IWM: side by side
| BC (Brunswick Corporation) | IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +21.7% | +28.4% |
| 5-year return | -15.3% | +41.5% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 35.8% | 19.8% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 1.22 | 1.06 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -56.5% | -27.5% |
| Market cap | $5.0B | – |
| P/E (trailing) | – | – |
| Dividend yield | 2.18% | 0.91% |
| Expense ratio | – | 0.19% |
| Assets under management | – | $80.1B |
| Sector / category | US Listed | ETF · US Small & Mid Cap |
IWM, iShares's Small Blend fund, carries $80.1B under management, 1757 holdings, a 0.19% expense ratio, a 0.91% trailing dividend yield.
Year-by-year returns
| Year | BC | IWM |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -27.1% | -20.5% |
| 2023 | +36.9% | +16.8% |
| 2024 | -31.8% | +11.4% |
| 2025 | +18.1% | +12.7% |
| 2026 | +6.2% | +22.3% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are BC and IWM good diversifiers for each other?
Somewhat, no more. With 0.76 correlation, most large moves hit both names, and the diversification benefit stays modest.
FAQ
What is the correlation between BC and IWM?
As of 2026-08-27, the correlation of weekly returns between BC and IWM is 0.76 over 3 years, 0.73 over 1 year and 0.73 over 5 years.
Is IWM a good diversifier for BC?
Somewhat, no more. With 0.76 correlation, most large moves hit both names, and the diversification benefit stays modest.
What does a correlation of 0.76 mean?
On the −1 to +1 scale, 0.76 describes how much the two returns move together: +1 is lockstep, 0 is independence, negative values mean opposite directions. It says nothing about which performed better.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/bc-vs-iwm.json
Drop this badge in a README or notebook; it updates with the data:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/bc-vs-iwm/)
No key needed, free to use. Full endpoint list in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: BC correlations · IWM correlations
