IWMI vs. IWMW
IWMI (NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF) and IWMW (iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. IWMI is actively managed, while IWMW is passively managed. Over the past year, IWMI returned 35.91% vs 25.30% for IWMW. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWMI charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for IWMW.
Performance
IWMI vs. IWMW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWMI achieves a 14.60% return, which is significantly higher than IWMW's 9.09% return.
IWMI
- 1D
- 1.10%
- 1M
- 3.08%
- YTD
- 14.60%
- 6M
- 13.67%
- 1Y
- 35.91%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWMW
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 2.91%
- YTD
- 9.09%
- 6M
- 9.30%
- 1Y
- 25.30%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWMI vs. IWMW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF | 14.60% | 14.97% | 6.61% |
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF | 9.09% | 7.82% | 8.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWMI and IWMW is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2024 | 0.91 |
The correlation between IWMI and IWMW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
IWMI vs. IWMW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWMI
IWMW
Healthcare
Industrials
Financial Services
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Healthcare
IWMI
IWMW
Industrials
IWMI
IWMW
Financial Services
IWMI
IWMW
Technology
IWMI
IWMW
Consumer Cyclical
IWMI
IWMW
Energy
IWMI
IWMW
Real Estate
IWMI
IWMW
Basic Materials
IWMI
IWMW
Utilities
IWMI
IWMW
Consumer Defensive
IWMI
IWMW
Communication Services
IWMI
IWMW
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. IWMW — Risk / Return Rank
IWMI
IWMW
IWMI vs. IWMW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) and iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW). 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.
| IWMI | IWMW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.41 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.29 | 3.66 | +0.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.85 | 12.67 | +5.18 |
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
| IWMI | IWMW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.43 | 2.07 | +0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.08 | 0.66 | +0.42 |
Drawdowns
IWMI vs. IWMW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWMI drawdown since its inception was -23.88%, which is greater than IWMW's maximum drawdown of -21.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMI and IWMW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWMI | IWMW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.88% | -21.82% | -2.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.40% | -6.94% | -1.46% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.11% | -3.84% | -0.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.02% | 2.00% | +0.02% |
Volatility
IWMI vs. IWMW - Volatility Comparison
NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) has a higher volatility of 4.28% compared to iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) at 3.01%. This indicates that IWMI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWMW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWMI | IWMW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.28% | 3.01% | +1.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.78% | 8.76% | +2.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.85% | 12.29% | +2.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.89% | 16.11% | +1.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.89% | 16.11% | +1.78% |
IWMI vs. IWMW - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWMI has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than IWMW's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWMI vs. IWMW - Dividend Comparison
IWMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.38%, less than IWMW's 22.28% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF | 13.38% | 14.05% | 8.78% |
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF | 22.28% | 20.98% | 17.73% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, IWMI and IWMW move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
IWMI has higher volatility (4.28%) compared to IWMW (3.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWMI dropped -23.88% vs IWMW's -21.82%.
On 1-year performance, IWMI leads with 35.91% vs 25.30% for IWMW. On fees, IWMW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, IWMW has been the lower-risk option at 3.01%. 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 35.91% return vs 25.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWMW is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for IWMI.
IWMW has the higher dividend yield at 22.28%, compared with 13.38% for IWMI.
They also come from different issuers: Neos and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for IWMI and 0.39% for IWMW.
IWMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 2.07), 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 IWMI and IWMW
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