IWMW vs. IWMI
IWMW (iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF) and IWMI (NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. IWMW is passively managed, while IWMI is actively managed. Over the past year, IWMW returned 25.30% vs 35.91% for IWMI. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWMW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for IWMI.
Performance
IWMW vs. IWMI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWMW achieves a 9.09% return, which is significantly lower than IWMI's 14.60% return.
IWMW
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 2.91%
- YTD
- 9.09%
- 6M
- 9.30%
- 1Y
- 25.30%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWMI
- 1D
- 1.10%
- 1M
- 3.08%
- YTD
- 14.60%
- 6M
- 13.67%
- 1Y
- 35.91%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWMW vs. IWMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF | 9.09% | 7.82% | 8.22% |
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF | 14.60% | 14.97% | 6.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWMW and IWMI 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 IWMW and IWMI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
IWMW vs. IWMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWMW
IWMI
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Technology
IWMW
IWMI
Industrials
IWMW
IWMI
Healthcare
IWMW
IWMI
Financial Services
IWMW
IWMI
Consumer Cyclical
IWMW
IWMI
Energy
IWMW
IWMI
Real Estate
IWMW
IWMI
Basic Materials
IWMW
IWMI
Utilities
IWMW
IWMI
Consumer Defensive
IWMW
IWMI
Communication Services
IWMW
IWMI
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. IWMI — Risk / Return Rank
IWMW
IWMI
IWMW vs. IWMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI). 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 | IWMI | 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 | 1.41 | 1.42 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.66 | 4.29 | -0.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.67 | 17.85 | -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
| IWMW | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.07 | 2.43 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.66 | 1.08 | -0.42 |
Drawdowns
IWMW vs. IWMI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWMW drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, smaller than the maximum IWMI drawdown of -23.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMW and IWMI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWMW | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.82% | -23.88% | +2.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.94% | -8.40% | +1.46% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.84% | -4.11% | +0.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.00% | 2.02% | -0.02% |
Volatility
IWMW vs. IWMI - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) is 3.01%, while NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) has a volatility of 4.28%. This indicates that IWMW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWMW | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.01% | 4.28% | -1.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.76% | 10.78% | -2.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.29% | 14.85% | -2.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.11% | 17.89% | -1.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.11% | 17.89% | -1.78% |
IWMW vs. IWMI - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWMW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than IWMI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWMW vs. IWMI - Dividend Comparison
IWMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 22.28%, more than IWMI's 13.38% 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, IWMW and IWMI 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, IWMW dropped -21.82% vs IWMI's -23.88%.
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: iShares and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IWMW and 0.68% for IWMI.
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 IWMW and IWMI
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