CXT vs IWM: Correlation
How closely do Crane NXT, Co. (CXT) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) trade together? Their weekly returns over three years give a correlation of 0.56, which is moderate.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are CXT and IWM?
Over the past 3 years, CXT and IWM moved with a correlation of 0.56, which is moderate. Recent behaviour matches the longer record: 0.51 over 1 year against 0.56 over 3. Over 5 years the correlation is 0.59, and the annualized covariance of weekly returns is 393.3 %².
Few assets follow CXT as closely as IWM, which ranks #1 of 11 tracked partners. Their recent paths diverged sharply: over the last 12 months IWM outperformed by 45.8 percentage points (-17.4% for CXT against +28.4% for IWM). Note the risk asymmetry: CXT runs 1.8 times the annualized volatility of the other leg, so equal-weighting the two is not an equal-risk position.
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.
CXT vs IWM: side by side
| CXT (Crane NXT, Co.) | IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | -17.4% | +28.4% |
| 5-year return | +48.9% | +41.5% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 35.7% | 19.8% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.98 | 1.06 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -47.0% | -27.5% |
| Market cap | $2.9B | – |
| P/E (trailing) | 20.5 | – |
| Dividend yield | 1.38% | 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 | CXT | IWM |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | +0.6% | -20.5% |
| 2023 | +64.9% | +16.8% |
| 2024 | +3.5% | +11.4% |
| 2025 | -18.2% | +12.7% |
| 2026 | +6.5% | +22.3% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Fund exposure
CXT represents 0.08% of IWM's portfolio, so part of any move in IWM is CXT itself, and the correlation between them is partly mechanical.
Are CXT and IWM good diversifiers for each other?
Somewhat, no more. With 0.56 correlation, most large moves hit both names, and the diversification benefit stays modest.
FAQ
What is the correlation between CXT and IWM?
Using weekly returns as of 2026-08-27: 0.56 over 3 years, with 0.51 over the last year and 0.59 over 5 years.
Is IWM a good diversifier for CXT?
Somewhat, no more. With 0.56 correlation, most large moves hit both names, and the diversification benefit stays modest.
What does a correlation of 0.56 mean?
Correlation ranges from −1 to +1. Values near +1 mean two assets move together, near 0 that they move independently, and negative values that they tend to move in opposite directions. It measures co-movement, not performance.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/cxt-vs-iwm.json
Drop this badge in a README or notebook; it updates with the data:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/cxt-vs-iwm/)
No key needed, free to use. Full endpoint list in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: CXT correlations · IWM correlations
