ISCV vs. IWN: A Skeptic’s Stroll Through Small-Cap ETFs

by

Ah, the eternal conundrum of the small-cap value investor! Here we find ourselves presented with two iShares offerings-ISCV and IWN-each claiming to be the paragon of diversified exposure to U.S. small-cap value stocks. One might imagine them as two well-meaning but slightly dim-witted gentlemen at a country club luncheon, both insisting they’ve discovered the perfect recipe for the perfect scone. Alas, the market, that most capricious of hosts, is unlikely to be impressed by either.

This comparative analysis, then, is less a matter of financial alchemy and more a gentle nudge toward self-awareness. After all, the true art lies not in choosing the “best” ETF but in recognizing that markets are a dance of chaos and hubris, and no fund can outwit the weather.

The Cost Conundrum

Metric ISCV IWN
Issuer iShares iShares
Expense ratio 0.06% 0.24%
1-yr return (as of Jan. 5, 2026) 8.78% 11.92%
Dividend yield 1.89% 1.57%
AUM $575 million $12 billion
Beta (5Y monthly) 1.22 1.20

ISCV, with its modest expense ratio of 0.06%, is the thrifty uncle who insists on bringing his own tea to the garden party. IWN, at 0.24%, is the cousin who orders three extra scones and then forgets to pay. Yet here lies the rub: while fees may seem a dashly clever way to save money, one must ask-what precisely is being saved? A pittance? A trifle? Or merely the illusion of prudence?

Risk and Reward: A Delicate Balancing Act

Metric ISCV IWN
Max drawdown (5 y) -25.34% -26.70%
Growth of $1,000 over 5 years $1,506 $1,427

The Portfolio Picnic

IWN, with its 1,419 holdings, is the sort of fund that throws a picnic for the entire village-though it leans rather heavily on financial services (26%), real estate (12%), and industrials (11%). Its top holdings-EchoStar, Hecla Mining Company, and Oklo-are like the village baker, the blacksmith, and the man who insists on carrying a parasol. Each holds less than 1% of assets, a charmingly modest arrangement that would make even the most risk-averse aunt beam with approval.

ISCV, meanwhile, offers a slightly different spread: 1,092 stocks, with financials at 21%, consumer cyclical at 15%, and industrials at 13%. Its top names-Sandisk, Rocket Companies, and Annaly Capital Management-are the sort of guests who arrive early, stay late, and never quite remember to leave. Again, each accounts for less than 1% of assets, a decision as prudent as it is unexciting.

For the investor seeking to avoid leverage and structural quirks, both funds are as reliable as a well-timed cup of Earl Grey. Yet one must wonder: does diversification truly protect against the storm, or merely allow one to drown in a more comfortable chair?

What This Means for the Investor, or, A Dash of Common Sense

Both ISCV and IWN offer portfolios so large they could stock a village market, with over 1,000 holdings apiece. The sector allocations differ-ISCV leans toward consumer cyclical, while IWN favors real estate-a distinction as subtle as the difference between a rainy day and a drizzle. For those with a preference for industry exposure, this could be a deciding factor. For the rest of us, it is but a footnote in the grand, foggy opera of investing.

The fee disparity is more pronounced. ISCV charges $6 per $10,000 annually, while IWN demands $24. One might call this a “dashedly clever” saving-or a mere rounding error in the face of market volatility. Dividend yields, too, offer a slight edge to ISCV (1.89% vs. 1.57%), though the difference is about as meaningful as the distinction between a very good scone and a moderately decent one.

Performance-wise, the two are as evenly matched as a pair of twins at a tea party. IWN outperformed ISCV over the past year, while ISCV edged ahead over five years. Their betas and max drawdowns are nearly identical, a testament to the fact that small-cap value is a field where even the winners lose money, albeit with varying degrees of grace.

Liquidity, however, is where IWN shines. With $12 billion in AUM, it is the sort of fund that can buy and sell large amounts without batting an eye. ISCV, at $575 million, is more of the “let’s whisper and hope no one notices” variety. For the high-rolling investor, this could be a boon. For the rest of us, it is but a footnote in the grand, foggy opera of investing.

Advertisement

Glossary

ETF: An exchange-traded fund, or the financial equivalent of a well-stocked larder.
Expense ratio: The annual fee, expressed as a percentage of assets, that one pays to the fund manager-often for the privilege of being wrong together.
Dividend yield: The annual dividends paid by a fund, expressed as a percentage of its current price. A number as comforting as a warm woolen blanket, if one ignores the fact that it’s made of threadbare hopes.
Beta: A measure of a fund’s volatility compared to the market. A figure as useful as a weather vane in a hurricane.
AUM: Assets under management, or the total market value of assets a fund manages. A number that often bears little resemblance to actual wisdom.
Max drawdown: The largest percentage drop from a fund’s peak value to its lowest point. A statistic that tells you more about the past than the future, which is perhaps the most honest thing about it.
Small-cap: Companies with relatively small market capitalizations, often the sort that thrive on optimism and caffeine.
Value stocks: Stocks considered undervalued based on financial metrics. A term that assumes markets are rational, which is rarely the case.
Index methodology: The rules and criteria used to select and weight securities within an index. A process that can be as opaque as a Victorian mystery novel.
Sector tilt: When a fund allocates a higher percentage of assets to certain industries. A decision that may reflect the fund’s biases rather than the market’s.
Single-stock risk: The risk associated with holding a large portion of assets in one company. A risk that is often underestimated until it is too late.
Total return: The investment’s price change plus all dividends and distributions. A number that is always welcome until it isn’t.

In the end, the choice between ISCV and IWN is less about finding the “best” and more about embracing the absurdity of the endeavor. After all, as any seasoned market skeptic will tell you, the real victory lies in not losing too much money-and perhaps, just perhaps, in enjoying the ride. 🕊️

Read More

2026-01-05 21:26