IWM vs. RYLD
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD).
IWM and RYLD are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IWM is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Russell 2000 Index. It was launched on May 22, 2000. RYLD is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index. It was launched on Apr 17, 2019. Both IWM and RYLD are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
IWM vs. RYLD - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
IWM vs. RYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.93% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 7.87% |
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF | 0.70% | 5.65% | 10.13% | 0.27% | -13.03% | 22.13% | -0.44% | 8.92% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 0.93% return, which is significantly higher than RYLD's 0.70% return.
IWM
- 1D
- 3.50%
- 1M
- -4.96%
- YTD
- 0.93%
- 6M
- 3.02%
- 1Y
- 25.66%
- 3Y*
- 12.94%
- 5Y*
- 3.34%
- 10Y*
- 9.76%
RYLD
- 1D
- 2.12%
- 1M
- -3.64%
- YTD
- 0.70%
- 6M
- 5.49%
- 1Y
- 11.70%
- 3Y*
- 6.08%
- 5Y*
- 2.21%
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
IWM vs. RYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than RYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
IWM vs. RYLD — Risk / Return Rank
IWM
RYLD
IWM vs. RYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) 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.
| IWM | RYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.11 | 0.72 | +0.40 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.66 | 1.13 | +0.53 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.21 | 1.19 | +0.03 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.82 | 0.92 | +0.90 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.76 | 4.48 | +2.29 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IWM | RYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.11 | 0.72 | +0.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 | 0.16 | -0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.43 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | 0.26 | +0.08 |
Correlation
The correlation between IWM and RYLD is 0.88, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
IWM vs. RYLD - Dividend Comparison
IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%, less than RYLD's 12.14% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 1.02% | 1.04% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% |
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF | 12.14% | 12.00% | 12.03% | 12.64% | 13.49% | 12.35% | 10.76% | 6.43% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
IWM vs. RYLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than RYLD's maximum drawdown of -41.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and RYLD.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWM | RYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.05% | -41.53% | -17.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.74% | -12.33% | -1.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.91% | -21.33% | -10.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.13% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.91% | -4.31% | -3.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.83% | -9.04% | -1.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.70% | 2.53% | +1.17% |
Volatility
IWM vs. RYLD - Volatility Comparison
iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 7.47% compared to Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) at 5.25%. This indicates that IWM'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 graphics...
Volatility by Period
| IWM | RYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.47% | 5.25% | +2.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.47% | 9.08% | +5.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.18% | 16.39% | +6.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.55% | 14.20% | +8.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.99% | 17.38% | +5.61% |