PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWMW vs. OMAH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWMW vs. OMAH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

IWMW vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison


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

19.2%
13.6%

Industrials

17.6%

-

Healthcare

16.6%
7.0%

Financial Services

16.0%
38.9%

Consumer Cyclical

7.8%
4.1%

Energy

6.4%
10.5%

Real Estate

5.8%

-

Basic Materials

4.8%

-

Utilities

3.1%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.2%
16.2%

Communication Services

2.0%
9.8%

Technology

IWMW
19.2%
OMAH
13.6%

Industrials

IWMW
17.6%
OMAH

-

Healthcare

IWMW
16.6%
OMAH
7.0%

Financial Services

IWMW
16.0%
OMAH
38.9%

Consumer Cyclical

IWMW
7.8%
OMAH
4.1%

Energy

IWMW
6.4%
OMAH
10.5%

Real Estate

IWMW
5.8%
OMAH

-

Basic Materials

IWMW
4.8%
OMAH

-

Utilities

IWMW
3.1%
OMAH

-

Consumer Defensive

IWMW
2.2%
OMAH
16.2%

Communication Services

IWMW
2.0%
OMAH
9.8%

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

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

IWMW
IWMW Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
IWMW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWMW Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWMW Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
IWMW Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWMW Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

OMAH
OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank
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. 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.


IWMWOMAHDifference
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

IWMW vs. OMAH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWMW Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is higher than the OMAH Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWMW and OMAH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IWMWOMAHDifference

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


IWMWOMAHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.34%

-2.65%

+2.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.85%

-1.26%

-2.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


IWMWOMAHDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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