PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWMI vs. AMDW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWMI vs. AMDW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) and Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF (AMDW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWMI achieves a 13.36% return, which is significantly lower than AMDW's 192.40% return.


IWMI

1D
-1.02%
1M
3.18%
YTD
13.36%
6M
13.24%
1Y
34.38%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

AMDW

1D
4.91%
1M
72.80%
YTD
192.40%
6M
186.02%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWMI vs. AMDW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
IWMI
NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF
13.36%11.81%
AMDW
Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF
192.40%34.24%

Correlation

The correlation between IWMI and AMDW is 0.51, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2025

0.51

IWMI vs. AMDW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWMI
AMDW

Healthcare

17.9%

-

Industrials

16.6%

-

Financial Services

16.0%

-

Technology

15.1%
28.6%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%

-

Energy

6.5%

-

Real Estate

6.3%

-

Basic Materials

5.0%

-

Utilities

3.1%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.6%

-

Communication Services

2.4%

-

Healthcare

IWMI
17.9%
AMDW

-

Industrials

IWMI
16.6%
AMDW

-

Financial Services

IWMI
16.0%
AMDW

-

Technology

IWMI
15.1%
AMDW
28.6%

Consumer Cyclical

IWMI
8.6%
AMDW

-

Energy

IWMI
6.5%
AMDW

-

Real Estate

IWMI
6.3%
AMDW

-

Basic Materials

IWMI
5.0%
AMDW

-

Utilities

IWMI
3.1%
AMDW

-

Consumer Defensive

IWMI
2.6%
AMDW

-

Communication Services

IWMI
2.4%
AMDW

-

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

IWMI vs. AMDW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IWMI
IWMI Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
IWMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWMI Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
IWMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWMI Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

AMDW
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

IWMI vs. AMDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) and Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF (AMDW). 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.


IWMIAMDWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.09

IWMI vs. AMDW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IWMIAMDWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.33

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.04

4.83

-3.79

Drawdowns

IWMI vs. AMDW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWMI drawdown since its inception was -23.88%, smaller than the maximum AMDW drawdown of -34.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMI and AMDW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWMIAMDWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.88%

-34.64%

+10.76%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.40%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.02%

0.00%

-1.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.12%

-14.66%

+10.54%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.02%

Volatility

IWMI vs. AMDW - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWMIAMDWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.84%

81.56%

-66.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.89%

81.56%

-63.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.89%

81.56%

-63.67%

IWMI vs. AMDW - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWMI has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than AMDW's 0.99% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWMI vs. AMDW - Dividend Comparison

IWMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.52%, less than AMDW's 28.98% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
AMDW
Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF
28.98%34.78%0.00%
IWMI
NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF
13.52%14.05%8.78%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWMI and AMDW have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IWMI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IWMI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AMDW.

AMDW has the higher dividend yield at 28.98%, compared with 13.52% for IWMI.

They also come from different issuers: Neos and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for IWMI and 0.99% for AMDW.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWMI and AMDW

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