IWMW vs. QYLD

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

IWMW (iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWMW is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IWMW returned 25.82% vs 22.07% for QYLD. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWMW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLD.

Performance

IWMW vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWMW achieves a 12.34% return, which is significantly higher than QYLD's 8.25% return.

IWMW

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 3.88%
• YTD: 12.34%
• 6M: 11.04%
• 1Y: 25.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QYLD

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: 1.12%
• YTD: 8.25%
• 6M: 7.89%
• 1Y: 22.07%
• 3Y*: 14.40%
• 5Y*: 8.29%
• 10Y*: 10.21%

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

IWMW vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF	12.34%	7.82%	5.85%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	8.25%	9.28%	12.69%

Correlation

The correlation between IWMW and QYLD is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2024	0.67

The correlation between IWMW and QYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWMW vs. QYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWMW	QYLD
Technology	19.1%	58.7%
Industrials	18.0%	2.6%
Healthcare	16.3%	3.7%
Financial Services	15.3%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	11.4%
Real Estate	5.9%	0.1%
Energy	5.4%	0.5%
Basic Materials	4.7%	1.0%
Utilities	2.7%	1.2%
Communication Services	2.4%	14.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	6.4%

Return for Risk

IWMW vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWMW

IWMW Risk / Return Rank: 77
IWMW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
IWMW Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
IWMW Omega Ratio Rank: 81
IWMW Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
IWMW Martin Ratio Rank: 77

QYLD

QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 88
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 91
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
QYLD 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. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	IWMW	QYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	2.29	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.83	3.21	-0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.51	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.74	4.46	-0.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.89	24.33	-11.45

IWMW vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWMW Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWMW and QYLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IWMW vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWMW drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, smaller than the maximum QYLD drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMW and QYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWMW	QYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.82%	-24.75%	+2.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.94%	-4.97%	-1.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.06%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-24.75%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.77%	+1.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.75%	-3.82%	+0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.01%	0.91%	+1.10%

Volatility

IWMW vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) is 3.32%, while Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) has a volatility of 4.78%. This indicates that IWMW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWMW	QYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.32%	4.78%	-1.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.29%	8.45%	+0.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.47%	9.69%	+2.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.04%	14.84%	+1.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.04%	15.55%	+0.49%

IWMW vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWMW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWMW vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

IWMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.63%, more than QYLD's 11.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF	21.63%	20.98%	17.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	11.64%	11.55%	12.50%	11.78%	13.75%	12.85%	11.16%	9.84%	12.44%	7.69%	9.15%	9.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWMW and QYLD in my portfolio?

IWMW and QYLD have a correlation of 0.70, 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 QYLD?

QYLD has higher volatility (4.78%) compared to IWMW (3.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWMW dropped -21.82% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, IWMW or QYLD?

On 1-year performance, IWMW leads with 25.82% vs 22.07% for QYLD. On fees, IWMW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, IWMW has been the lower-risk option at 3.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWMW or QYLD?

Over the 1-year period, IWMW has performed better with a 25.82% return vs 22.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWMW or QYLD?

IWMW is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLD.

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

IWMW has the higher dividend yield at 21.63%, compared with 11.64% for QYLD.

What is the main difference between IWMW and QYLD?

IWMW is categorized as Derivative Income, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. IWMW tracks Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IWMW and 0.60% for QYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 2.08), 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.