IWMW vs. BUCK

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWMW (iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF) and BUCK (Simplify Treasury Option Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWMW is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while BUCK is a Government Bonds fund actively managed by Simplify. IWMW is passively managed, while BUCK is actively managed. Over the past year, IWMW returned 24.62% vs 7.95% for BUCK. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWMW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BUCK.

Performance

IWMW vs. BUCK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and Simplify Treasury Option Income ETF (BUCK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWMW achieves a 8.49% return, which is significantly higher than BUCK's 1.90% return.

IWMW

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 3.04%
• YTD: 8.49%
• 6M: 8.94%
• 1Y: 24.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUCK

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 1.90%
• 6M: 2.09%
• 1Y: 7.95%
• 3Y*: 5.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWMW vs. BUCK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF	8.49%	7.82%	6.09%
BUCK Simplify Treasury Option Income ETF	1.90%	4.13%	4.73%

Correlation

The correlation between IWMW and BUCK is 0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2024	0.11

IWMW vs. BUCK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWMW	BUCK
Technology	19.2%	-
Industrials	17.6%	-
Healthcare	16.6%	-
Financial Services	16.0%	100.0%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	-
Energy	6.4%	-
Real Estate	5.8%	-
Basic Materials	4.8%	-
Utilities	3.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	-
Communication Services	2.0%	-

Return for Risk

IWMW vs. BUCK — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWMW

IWMW Risk / Return Rank: 64
IWMW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
IWMW Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
IWMW Omega Ratio Rank: 66
IWMW Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
IWMW Martin Ratio Rank: 67

BUCK

BUCK Risk / Return Rank: 87
BUCK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
BUCK Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
BUCK Omega Ratio Rank: 86
BUCK Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
BUCK Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

IWMW vs. BUCK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and Simplify Treasury Option Income ETF (BUCK). 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.

	IWMW	BUCK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	2.54	-0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.75	3.83	-1.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.54	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	6.11	-2.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.33	32.31	-19.99
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWMW vs. BUCK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWMW Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is comparable to the BUCK Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWMW and BUCK, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWMW	BUCK	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.01	2.54	-0.53
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.64	1.47	-0.83

Drawdowns

IWMW vs. BUCK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWMW drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, which is greater than BUCK's maximum drawdown of -5.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMW and BUCK.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWMW	BUCK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.82%	-5.43%	-16.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.94%	-1.31%	-5.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-5.43%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-0.04%	-0.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.85%	-0.49%	-3.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.00%	0.25%	+1.75%

Volatility

IWMW vs. BUCK - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) has a higher volatility of 3.03% compared to Simplify Treasury Option Income ETF (BUCK) at 0.70%. This indicates that IWMW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUCK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWMW	BUCK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.03%	0.70%	+2.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.75%	1.53%	+7.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.32%	3.14%	+9.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.12%	3.49%	+12.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.12%	3.49%	+12.63%

IWMW vs. BUCK - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWMW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than BUCK's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWMW vs. BUCK - Dividend Comparison

IWMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 22.40%, more than BUCK's 7.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BUCK Simplify Treasury Option Income ETF	7.42%	7.59%	8.84%	4.84%	0.59%
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF	22.40%	20.98%	17.73%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWMW and BUCK in my portfolio?

IWMW and BUCK have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWMW or BUCK?

IWMW has higher volatility (3.03%) compared to BUCK (0.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWMW dropped -21.82% vs BUCK's -5.43%.

Which ETF is better, IWMW or BUCK?

On 1-year performance, IWMW leads with 24.62% vs 7.95% for BUCK. On fees, BUCK is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BUCK has been the lower-risk option at 0.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWMW or BUCK?

Over the 1-year period, IWMW has performed better with a 24.62% return vs 7.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWMW or BUCK?

BUCK is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for IWMW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWMW or BUCK?

IWMW has the higher dividend yield at 22.40%, compared with 7.42% for BUCK.

What is the main difference between IWMW and BUCK?

IWMW is categorized as Derivative Income, while BUCK is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IWMW and 0.35% for BUCK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUCK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 2.01), 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.