CARD vs. RWM
CARD (Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) are both Inverse Equities funds - CARD tracks the Prime Auto Industry Index - Benchmark TR Net (--300%) while RWM tracks the Russell 2000 (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CARD returned -35.78% vs -25.94% for RWM. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
CARD vs. RWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CARD achieves a -2.60% return, which is significantly higher than RWM's -13.83% return.
CARD
- 1D
- 1.10%
- 1M
- -13.67%
- YTD
- -2.60%
- 6M
- -2.07%
- 1Y
- -35.78%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RWM
- 1D
- 1.37%
- 1M
- -3.30%
- YTD
- -13.83%
- 6M
- -12.66%
- 1Y
- -25.94%
- 3Y*
- -12.10%
- 5Y*
- -5.21%
- 10Y*
- -11.85%
CARD vs. RWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CARD Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN | -2.60% | -60.21% | -58.19% | -30.38% |
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | -13.83% | -9.40% | -5.91% | -6.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between CARD and RWM is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 29, 2023 | 0.74 |
The correlation between CARD and RWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CARD vs. RWM — Risk / Return Rank
CARD
RWM
CARD vs. RWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (CARD) and ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| CARD | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 0.79 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.72 | -0.95 | +0.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.06 | -1.65 | +0.59 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CARD | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.52 | -1.37 | +0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.23 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.51 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.65 | -0.49 | -0.17 |
Drawdowns
CARD vs. RWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CARD drawdown since its inception was -93.51%, roughly equal to the maximum RWM drawdown of -95.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CARD and RWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CARD | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -93.51% | -95.47% | +1.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -49.57% | -27.26% | -22.31% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -41.38% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -41.38% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -73.72% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -92.68% | -95.41% | +2.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -68.13% | -74.04% | +5.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 33.93% | 15.73% | +18.20% |
Volatility
CARD vs. RWM - Volatility Comparison
Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (CARD) has a higher volatility of 22.80% compared to ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) at 5.84%. This indicates that CARD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CARD | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 22.80% | 5.84% | +16.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 50.05% | 13.52% | +36.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 68.70% | 19.07% | +49.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 80.53% | 22.56% | +57.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 80.53% | 23.11% | +57.42% |
CARD vs. RWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CARD and RWM have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
CARD vs. RWM - Dividend Comparison
CARD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CARD Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | 4.12% | 3.97% | 6.03% | 4.78% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.20% | 1.55% | 0.87% | 0.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CARD and RWM have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CARD has higher volatility (22.80%) compared to RWM (5.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CARD dropped -93.51% vs RWM's -95.47%.
On 1-year performance, RWM leads with -25.94% vs -35.78% for CARD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, RWM has been the lower-risk option at 5.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RWM has performed better with a -25.94% return vs -35.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CARD and RWM have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
RWM has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 0.00% for CARD.
CARD tracks Prime Auto Industry Index - Benchmark TR Net (--300%), while RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%). They also come from different issuers: Max and ProShares.
CARD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.52 vs -1.37), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for CARD and RWM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer