IWMW vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWMW (iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWMW is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IWMW returned 24.62% vs 39.10% for IWM. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWMW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

IWMW vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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 lower than IWM's 17.07% return.

IWMW

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

IWM

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: 3.52%
• YTD: 17.07%
• 6M: 15.83%
• 1Y: 39.10%
• 3Y*: 17.88%
• 5Y*: 6.11%
• 10Y*: 10.93%

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

IWMW vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF	8.49%	7.82%	6.09%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	17.07%	12.66%	10.45%

Correlation

The correlation between IWMW and IWM is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2024	0.91

The correlation between IWMW and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWMW vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWMW	IWM
Technology	19.2%	19.5%
Industrials	17.6%	17.1%
Healthcare	16.6%	15.8%
Financial Services	16.0%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	7.8%
Energy	6.4%	6.0%
Real Estate	5.8%	5.7%
Basic Materials	4.8%	4.5%
Utilities	3.1%	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	2.1%
Communication Services	2.0%	2.0%

Return for Risk

IWMW vs. IWM — 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

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 62
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	2.05	-0.04
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.75	2.85	-0.11
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.34	+0.07
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	3.56	0.00
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.33	12.64	-0.32
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. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWMW Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWMW and IWM, 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	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.01	2.05	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.27	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.64	0.37	+0.27

Drawdowns

IWMW vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWMW drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMW and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWMW	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.82%	-59.05%	+37.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.94%	-11.03%	+4.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-27.50%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-31.91%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-1.49%	+1.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.85%	-10.77%	+6.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.00%	3.10%	-1.10%

Volatility

IWMW vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) is 3.03%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that IWMW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWMW	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.03%	5.75%	-2.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.75%	13.53%	-4.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.32%	19.20%	-6.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.12%	22.52%	-6.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.12%	23.04%	-6.92%

IWMW vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWMW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWMW vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

IWMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 22.40%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	0.88%	1.04%	1.15%	1.35%	1.48%	0.94%	1.04%	1.26%	1.40%	1.26%	1.38%	1.54%
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF	22.40%	20.98%	17.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWMW and IWM in my portfolio?

IWMW and IWM have a correlation of 0.90, 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 IWM?

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to IWMW (3.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWMW dropped -21.82% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, IWMW or IWM?

On 1-year performance, IWM leads with 39.10% vs 24.62% for IWMW. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWMW has been the lower-risk option at 3.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWMW or IWM?

Over the 1-year period, IWM has performed better with a 39.10% return vs 24.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWMW or IWM?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for IWMW.

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

IWMW has the higher dividend yield at 22.40%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

What is the main difference between IWMW and IWM?

IWMW is categorized as Derivative Income, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IWMW tracks Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IWMW and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 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.