PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWC vs. RYLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWC vs. RYLD

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

IWC (iShares Micro-Cap ETF) and RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWC is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell Microcap Index, while RYLD is a Derivative Income fund tracking the CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWC returned 6.69%/yr vs 3.15%/yr for RYLD. Their correlation of 0.84 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

IWC vs. RYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWC achieves a 19.50% return, which is significantly higher than RYLD's 12.29% return.

IWC

1D
-0.70%
1M
-5.03%
6M
12.92%
YTD
19.50%
1Y
48.46%
3Y*
19.06%
5Y*
6.69%
10Y*
11.12%
ALL TIME*
7.67%

RYLD

1D
-0.19%
1M
1.19%
6M
10.16%
YTD
12.29%
1Y
24.93%
3Y*
8.04%
5Y*
3.15%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
5.81%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

IWC

iShares Micro-Cap ETF
$9.94M$13.29M$20.50M

RYLD

Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF
$10.07M$9.36M$9.08M

IWC vs. RYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IWC
iShares Micro-Cap ETF		19.50%22.45%13.63%8.99%-21.93%18.67%20.88%8.03%
RYLD
Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF		12.29%5.65%10.13%0.27%-13.03%22.13%-0.44%8.86%

Correlation

The correlation between IWC and RYLD is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2019

0.84

The correlation between IWC and RYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWC vs. RYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWC
RYLD

Healthcare

25.8%
20.3%

Financial Services

24.1%
17.8%

Industrials

12.3%
14.1%

Technology

12.3%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

7.7%
9.2%

Basic Materials

4.3%
4.4%

Real Estate

4.0%
6.8%

Energy

3.1%
5.5%

Communication Services

3.0%
2.2%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
2.6%

Utilities

0.7%
2.8%

Healthcare

IWC
25.8%
RYLD
20.3%

Financial Services

IWC
24.1%
RYLD
17.8%

Industrials

IWC
12.3%
RYLD
14.1%

Technology

IWC
12.3%
RYLD
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IWC
7.7%
RYLD
9.2%

Basic Materials

IWC
4.3%
RYLD
4.4%

Real Estate

IWC
4.0%
RYLD
6.8%

Energy

IWC
3.1%
RYLD
5.5%

Communication Services

IWC
3.0%
RYLD
2.2%

Consumer Defensive

IWC
2.4%
RYLD
2.6%

Utilities

IWC
0.7%
RYLD
2.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Micro-Cap ETF

Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF

Often compared with IWC:
IWC vs. IWMIWC vs. FDMIWC vs. SPYIWC vs. IWXIWC vs. PVIVXIWC vs. VOOIWC vs. VT
Often compared with RYLD:
RYLD vs. QYLDRYLD vs. XYLDRYLD vs. JEPIRYLD vs. IWMRYLD vs. SVOLRYLD vs. SCHDRYLD vs. QQQ

Return for Risk

IWC vs. RYLD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
IWC
IWC Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
IWC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWC Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
IWC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWC Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
RYLD
RYLD Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
RYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
RYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
RYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
RYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IWC vs. RYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

IWCRYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.89
2.17

-0.28

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.56
3.05

-0.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.45

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.67

3.67

0.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.65

15.02

-3.38

IWC vs. RYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWC Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is comparable to the RYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWC and RYLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IWC vs. RYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWC drawdown since its inception was -64.61%, which is greater than RYLD's maximum drawdown of -41.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWC and RYLD.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWCRYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.61%

-41.53%

-23.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.43%

-6.29%

-6.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.46%

-19.05%

-10.41%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.61%

-21.33%

-19.28%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.21%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.31%

-0.37%

-5.94%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.18%

-8.65%

-6.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.91%

1.54%

+2.37%

Volatility

IWC vs. RYLD - Volatility Comparison

iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC) has a higher volatility of 4.63% compared to Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) at 2.07%. This indicates that IWC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWCRYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.63%

2.07%

+2.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.22%

7.73%

+10.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.13%

10.67%

+13.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.46%

13.97%

+10.49%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.48%

17.04%

+7.44%

IWC vs. RYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IWC and RYLD have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

IWC vs. RYLD - Dividend Comparison

IWC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than RYLD's 11.62% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWC
iShares Micro-Cap ETF		1.01%1.10%1.06%1.17%1.18%0.78%0.98%1.19%1.01%1.09%1.16%1.49%
RYLD
Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF		11.62%12.00%12.03%12.64%13.49%12.35%10.76%6.43%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

IWC and RYLD have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWC has higher volatility (4.63%) compared to RYLD (2.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWC dropped -64.61% vs RYLD's -41.53%.

On 5-year performance, IWC leads with 6.69% vs 3.15% for RYLD. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, RYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWC has performed better with a 6.69% return vs 3.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWC and RYLD have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

RYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.62%, compared with 1.01% for IWC.

IWC is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while RYLD is Derivative Income. IWC tracks Russell Microcap Index, while RYLD tracks CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X.

RYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.17 vs 1.89), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWC and RYLD

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