IMRA vs. IWMI
IMRA (Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF) and IWMI (NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, IMRA returned -32.66% vs 34.38% for IWMI. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IMRA charges 0.98%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for IWMI.
Performance
IMRA vs. IWMI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMRA achieves a 30.26% return, which is significantly higher than IWMI's 13.36% return.
IMRA
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- 9.36%
- YTD
- 30.26%
- 6M
- 0.68%
- 1Y
- -32.66%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWMI
- 1D
- -1.02%
- 1M
- 3.18%
- YTD
- 13.36%
- 6M
- 13.24%
- 1Y
- 34.38%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IMRA vs. IWMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IMRA Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF | 30.26% | -33.37% |
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF | 13.36% | 29.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMRA and IWMI is 0.54, 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 | 0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025 | 0.57 |
The correlation between IMRA and IWMI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.57 - 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
IMRA vs. IWMI — Risk / Return Rank
IMRA
IWMI
IMRA vs. IWMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (IMRA) and NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI). 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.
| IMRA | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.41 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.53 | 4.11 | -4.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.86 | 17.09 | -17.95 |
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
| IMRA | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.55 | 2.33 | -2.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.19 | 1.04 | -1.23 |
Drawdowns
IMRA vs. IWMI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMRA drawdown since its inception was -61.55%, which is greater than IWMI's maximum drawdown of -23.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMRA and IWMI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMRA | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.55% | -23.88% | -37.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -61.55% | -8.40% | -53.15% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -40.71% | -1.02% | -39.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.21% | -4.12% | -24.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 37.93% | 2.02% | +35.91% |
Volatility
IMRA vs. IWMI - Volatility Comparison
Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (IMRA) has a higher volatility of 9.53% compared to NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) at 4.31%. This indicates that IMRA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMRA | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.53% | 4.31% | +5.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 43.61% | 10.74% | +32.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 59.89% | 14.84% | +45.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 61.39% | 17.89% | +43.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 61.39% | 17.89% | +43.50% |
IMRA vs. IWMI - Expense Ratio Comparison
IMRA has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is higher than IWMI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
IMRA vs. IWMI - Dividend Comparison
IMRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 108.66%, more than IWMI's 13.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
IMRA Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF | 108.66% | 188.74% | 0.00% |
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF | 13.52% | 14.05% | 8.78% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IMRA and IWMI have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IMRA has higher volatility (9.53%) compared to IWMI (4.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMRA dropped -61.55% vs IWMI's -23.88%.
On 1-year performance, IWMI leads with 34.38% vs -32.66% for IMRA. On fees, IWMI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, IWMI has been the lower-risk option at 4.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IWMI has performed better with a 34.38% return vs -32.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWMI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for IMRA.
IMRA has the higher dividend yield at 108.66%, compared with 13.52% for IWMI.
They also come from different issuers: Bitwise and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for IMRA and 0.68% for IWMI.
IWMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs -0.55), 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 IMRA and IWMI
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