ICLN vs IWM: Correlation & Overlap
How closely do iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) trade together? Their weekly returns over three years give a correlation of 0.53, which is moderate. By holdings, the two funds overlap 0.3% by weight.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are ICLN and IWM?
Over the past 3 years, ICLN and IWM moved with a correlation of 0.53, which is moderate. Recent behaviour matches the longer record: 0.47 over 1 year against 0.53 over 3. Over 5 years the correlation is 0.59, and the annualized covariance of weekly returns is 251.8 %².
Among the 78 assets we track against ICLN, IWM ranks #24 by 3-year correlation. Their 12-month results are close: +25.6% for ICLN against +28.4% for IWM. Do not treat this figure as fixed: across three years the rolling one-year correlation ranged all the way from 0.27 to 0.82.
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.
ICLN vs IWM: side by side
| ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) | IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +25.6% | +28.4% |
| 5-year return | -18.4% | +41.5% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 24.0% | 19.8% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.78 | 1.06 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -34.6% | -27.5% |
| Dividend yield | 1.05% | 0.91% |
| Expense ratio | 0.39% | 0.19% |
| Assets under management | $2.3B | $80.1B |
| Sector / category | ETF · Thematic | ETF · US Small & Mid Cap |
On the fund side, ICLN sits in the Miscellaneous Sector category at iShares, with $2.3B under management, 102 holdings, a 0.39% expense ratio, a 1.05% 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 ICLN and IWM
The two portfolios are largely distinct, with 7 holdings in common adding up to 0.3% of fund weight. Where correlation shows the co-movement, the overlap shows its source.
| Common holding | Weight in ICLN | Weight in IWM |
|---|---|---|
| PLUG | 2.81% | 0.09% |
| SHLS | 1.14% | 0.04% |
| REX | 0.36% | 0.04% |
| GPRE | 0.97% | 0.03% |
| TE | 0.88% | 0.03% |
| CSIQ | 0.60% | 0.02% |
| ARRY | 0.67% | 0.02% |
Largest positions held only by ICLN: FSLR (7.87%), 600900 (7.64%), BE (7.36%), NXT (6.81%), ENPH (4.70%). 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. Top 7 common positions shown.
Year-by-year returns
| Year | ICLN | IWM |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -5.4% | -20.5% |
| 2023 | -20.4% | +16.8% |
| 2024 | -25.7% | +11.4% |
| 2025 | +47.0% | +12.7% |
| 2026 | +8.8% | +22.3% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are ICLN and IWM good diversifiers for each other?
Somewhat, no more. With 0.53 correlation, most large moves hit both names, and the diversification benefit stays modest.
FAQ
What is the correlation between ICLN and IWM?
As of 2026-08-27, the correlation of weekly returns between ICLN and IWM is 0.53 over 3 years, 0.47 over 1 year and 0.59 over 5 years.
Is IWM a good diversifier for ICLN?
Somewhat, no more. With 0.53 correlation, most large moves hit both names, and the diversification benefit stays modest.
How much do ICLN and IWM overlap?
Per the issuers' own portfolio disclosures (2026-08-26), the overlap is 0.3% by weight over 7 common positions.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/icln-vs-iwm.json
Drop this badge in a README or notebook; it updates with the data:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/icln-vs-iwm/)
No key needed, free to use. Full endpoint list in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: ICLN correlations · IWM correlations
