FXI vs IWM: Correlation & Overlap
How closely do iShares China Large-Cap ETF (FXI) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) trade together? Their weekly returns over three years give a correlation of 0.29, which is weak. The two funds also share 0% of their portfolios by weight.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are FXI and IWM?
On 3 years of weekly data the FXI/IWM correlation comes out at 0.29, weak. Recent behaviour matches the longer record: 0.31 over 1 year against 0.29 over 3. The 5-year figure is 0.30, and annualized covariance runs at 146.2 %².
By 3-year correlation, IWM places #52 of the 74 assets tracked against FXI. Correlation aside, the last 12 months split them widely, with IWM ahead by 34.5 points (-6.1% versus +28.4%). The rolling one-year correlation moved between 0.17 and 0.66 over the past three years, a moderate range.
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.
FXI vs IWM: side by side
| FXI (iShares China Large-Cap ETF) | IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | -6.1% | +28.4% |
| 5-year return | -1.4% | +41.5% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 25.3% | 19.8% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.68 | 1.06 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -23.2% | -27.5% |
| Dividend yield | 1.87% | 0.91% |
| Expense ratio | 0.73% | 0.19% |
| Assets under management | $4.3B | $80.1B |
| Sector / category | ETF · International | ETF · US Small & Mid Cap |
FXI, iShares's Greater China Region fund, carries $4.3B under management, 50 holdings, a 0.73% expense ratio, a 1.87% trailing dividend yield. IWM, iShares's Small Blend fund, carries $80.1B under management, 1757 holdings, a 0.19% expense ratio, a 0.91% trailing dividend yield.
Portfolio overlap between FXI and IWM
The two portfolios are largely distinct, with 0 holdings in common adding up to 0% of fund weight. Where correlation shows the co-movement, the overlap shows its source.
Largest positions held only by FXI: 9988 (9.72%), 939 (9.09%), 700 (8.51%), 1398 (6.35%), 1810 (5.16%). Only by IWM: MOGA (0.35%), UMBF (0.34%), CYTK (0.33%), GKOS (0.33%), EAT (0.33%).
Overlap = sum of the smaller of the two weights across common holdings, from issuer disclosures as of 2026-08-26.
Year-by-year returns
| Year | FXI | IWM |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -20.7% | -20.5% |
| 2023 | -12.4% | +16.8% |
| 2024 | +29.0% | +11.4% |
| 2025 | +28.9% | +12.7% |
| 2026 | -7.3% | +22.3% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are FXI and IWM good diversifiers for each other?
Reasonably. At 0.29, FXI and IWM keep a meaningful degree of independence, and combining them has historically reduced portfolio volatility.
FAQ
What is the correlation between FXI and IWM?
Using weekly returns as of 2026-08-27: 0.29 over 3 years, with 0.31 over the last year and 0.30 over 5 years.
Is IWM a good diversifier for FXI?
Reasonably. At 0.29, FXI and IWM keep a meaningful degree of independence, and combining them has historically reduced portfolio volatility.
How much do FXI and IWM overlap?
Per the issuers' own portfolio disclosures (2026-08-26), the overlap is 0% by weight over 0 common positions.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/fxi-vs-iwm.json
Drop this badge in a README or notebook; it updates with the data:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/fxi-vs-iwm/)
No key needed, free to use. Full endpoint list in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: FXI correlations · IWM correlations
