IWMW vs. ABLS
IWMW (iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF) and ABLS (Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWMW is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while ABLS is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IWMW returned 27.46% vs 17.00% for ABLS. Their 0.77 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.39% expense ratio.
Performance
IWMW vs. ABLS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWMW achieves a 16.00% return, which is significantly lower than ABLS's 18.36% return.
IWMW
- 1D
- 0.93%
- 1M
- 2.47%
- 6M
- 13.33%
- YTD
- 16.00%
- 1Y
- 27.46%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 12.47%
ABLS
- 1D
- 1.76%
- 1M
- -0.03%
- 6M
- 21.59%
- YTD
- 18.36%
- 1Y
- 17.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 5.46%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $99.58K | $75.99K | $41.67K | |
| $588.35K | $501.88K | $531.86K |
IWMW vs. ABLS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF | 16.00% | 2.71% |
ABLS Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF | 18.36% | -8.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWMW and ABLS is 0.73, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025 | 0.77 |
The correlation between IWMW and ABLS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.77 - 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
IWMW vs. ABLS — Risk / Return Rank
IWMW
ABLS
IWMW vs. ABLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF (ABLS). 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.
| IWMW | ABLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.57 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.16 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.97 | 1.06 | +2.92 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.75 | 2.92 | +10.83 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWMW vs. ABLS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWMW drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, which is greater than ABLS's maximum drawdown of -19.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMW and ABLS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWMW | ABLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.82% | -19.28% | -2.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.94% | -16.19% | +9.25% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.80% | +0.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.60% | -7.76% | +4.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.00% | 5.84% | -3.84% |
Volatility
IWMW vs. ABLS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) is 3.21%, while Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF (ABLS) has a volatility of 6.24%. This indicates that IWMW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ABLS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWMW | ABLS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.21% | 6.24% | -3.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.40% | 13.74% | -4.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.61% | 18.39% | -5.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.81% | 21.12% | -5.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.81% | 21.12% | -5.31% |
IWMW vs. ABLS - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both IWMW and ABLS have an expense ratio of 0.39%.
Dividends
IWMW vs. ABLS - Dividend Comparison
IWMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 20.25%, more than ABLS's 12.17% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
ABLS Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF | 12.17% | 14.04% | 0.00% |
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF | 20.25% | 20.98% | 17.73% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWMW and ABLS have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ABLS has higher volatility (6.24%) compared to IWMW (3.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWMW dropped -21.82% vs ABLS's -19.28%.
On 1-year performance, IWMW leads with 27.46% vs 17.00% for ABLS. Both ETFs have the same 0.39% expense ratio. On volatility, IWMW has been the lower-risk option at 3.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IWMW has performed better with a 27.46% return vs 17.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWMW and ABLS have the same expense ratio: 0.39% per year.
IWMW has the higher dividend yield at 20.25%, compared with 12.17% for ABLS.
IWMW is categorized as Derivative Income, while ABLS is Small Cap Blend Equities. IWMW tracks Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while ABLS tracks Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Abacus.
IWMW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 0.93), 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 IWMW and ABLS
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