IWMW vs. OMAH
IWMW (iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF) and OMAH (VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. IWMW is passively managed, while OMAH is actively managed. Over the past year, IWMW returned 24.62% vs 11.44% for OMAH. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWMW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for OMAH.
Performance
IWMW vs. OMAH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWMW achieves a 8.49% return, which is significantly higher than OMAH's 4.56% return.
IWMW
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- 3.04%
- YTD
- 8.49%
- 6M
- 8.94%
- 1Y
- 24.62%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
OMAH
- 1D
- -0.70%
- 1M
- 0.44%
- YTD
- 4.56%
- 6M
- 4.00%
- 1Y
- 11.44%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWMW vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF | 8.49% | 10.59% |
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF | 4.56% | 6.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWMW and OMAH is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2025 | 0.55 |
The correlation between IWMW and OMAH shifts across timeframes, from 0.45 (1 year) to 0.55 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
IWMW vs. OMAH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWMW
OMAH
Technology
Industrials
-
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Technology
IWMW
OMAH
Industrials
IWMW
OMAH
-
Healthcare
IWMW
OMAH
Financial Services
IWMW
OMAH
Consumer Cyclical
IWMW
OMAH
Energy
IWMW
OMAH
Real Estate
IWMW
OMAH
-
Basic Materials
IWMW
OMAH
-
Utilities
IWMW
OMAH
-
Consumer Defensive
IWMW
OMAH
Communication Services
IWMW
OMAH
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. OMAH — Risk / Return Rank
IWMW
OMAH
IWMW vs. OMAH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). 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 | OMAH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.25 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.56 | 3.82 | -0.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.33 | 9.48 | +2.85 |
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 | OMAH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.01 | 1.43 | +0.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.64 | 0.70 | -0.06 |
Drawdowns
IWMW vs. OMAH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWMW drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, which is greater than OMAH's maximum drawdown of -11.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMW and OMAH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWMW | OMAH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.82% | -11.83% | -9.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.94% | -3.00% | -3.94% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.34% | -2.65% | +2.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.85% | -1.26% | -2.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.00% | 1.21% | +0.79% |
Volatility
IWMW vs. OMAH - Volatility Comparison
iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) has a higher volatility of 3.03% compared to VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) at 1.93%. This indicates that IWMW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OMAH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWMW | OMAH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.03% | 1.93% | +1.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.75% | 5.49% | +3.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.32% | 8.05% | +4.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.12% | 13.21% | +2.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.12% | 13.21% | +2.91% |
IWMW vs. OMAH - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWMW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than OMAH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWMW vs. OMAH - Dividend Comparison
IWMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 22.40%, more than OMAH's 15.44% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF | 22.40% | 20.98% | 17.73% |
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF | 15.44% | 12.86% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWMW and OMAH have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWMW has higher volatility (3.03%) compared to OMAH (1.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWMW dropped -21.82% vs OMAH's -11.83%.
On 1-year performance, IWMW leads with 24.62% vs 11.44% for OMAH. On fees, IWMW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, OMAH has been the lower-risk option at 1.93%. 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 24.62% return vs 11.44%. 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 0.95% for OMAH.
IWMW has the higher dividend yield at 22.40%, compared with 15.44% for OMAH.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and VistaShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IWMW and 0.95% for OMAH.
IWMW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs 1.43), 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 OMAH
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