IWM vs LCII: Correlation
Measured on weekly returns over the past three years, iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and LCI Industries (LCII) carry a correlation of 0.62, a strong link.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are IWM and LCII?
Across a 3-year window, the weekly returns of IWM and LCII correlate at 0.62, strong. The link has loosened recently: the 1-year correlation (0.35) runs below the 3-year figure (0.62). Stretching to 5 years gives 0.66, with an annualized covariance of 424.3 %².
Among the 320 assets we track against IWM, LCII ranks #99 by 3-year correlation. Their recent paths diverged sharply: over the last 12 months IWM outperformed by 28.7 percentage points (+28.4% for IWM against -0.3% for LCII). Note the risk asymmetry: LCII runs 1.7 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.
IWM vs LCII: side by side
| IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) | LCII (LCI Industries) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +28.4% | -0.3% |
| 5-year return | +41.5% | -12.8% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 19.8% | 34.4% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 1.06 | 0.95 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -27.5% | -41.8% |
| Market cap | – | $2.5B |
| P/E (trailing) | – | 11.9 |
| Dividend yield | 0.91% | 4.47% |
| Expense ratio | 0.19% | – |
| Assets under management | $80.1B | – |
| Sector / category | ETF · US Small & Mid Cap | US Listed |
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 | IWM | LCII |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -20.5% | -38.5% |
| 2023 | +16.8% | +41.1% |
| 2024 | +11.4% | -14.6% |
| 2025 | +12.7% | +22.8% |
| 2026 | +22.3% | -13.1% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Fund exposure
LCII represents 0.08% of IWM's portfolio, so part of any move in IWM is LCII itself, and the correlation between them is partly mechanical.
Are IWM and LCII good diversifiers for each other?
Only partially. A correlation of 0.62 means IWM and LCII share most of their swings. Pairing them dampens volatility somewhat, but it will not protect against a common drawdown.
FAQ
What is the correlation between IWM and LCII?
The IWM/LCII correlation stands at 0.62 on a 3-year window (1 year: 0.35, 5 years: 0.66), computed from weekly returns as of 2026-08-27.
Is LCII a good diversifier for IWM?
Only partially. A correlation of 0.62 means IWM and LCII share most of their swings. Pairing them dampens volatility somewhat, but it will not protect against a common drawdown.
What does a correlation of 0.62 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/iwm-vs-lcii.json
Embed this badge (it refreshes with the data), with attribution:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/iwm-vs-lcii/)
Free with attribution; caching and terms are described in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: IWM correlations · LCII correlations
