MSFD vs. RWM
MSFD (Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares) and RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) are both Inverse Equities funds - MSFD tracks the Microsoft Corporation (-100%) while RWM tracks the Russell 2000 (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MSFD returned -10.70%/yr vs -10.10%/yr for RWM. Their 0.37 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. MSFD charges 1.06%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for RWM.
Performance
MSFD vs. RWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MSFD achieves a -1.78% return, which is significantly higher than RWM's -14.68% return.
MSFD
- 1D
- -2.88%
- 1M
- -18.05%
- 6M
- -11.78%
- YTD
- -1.78%
- 1Y
- 7.40%
- 3Y*
- -10.70%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -15.36%
RWM
- 1D
- 0.44%
- 1M
- 2.46%
- 6M
- -10.35%
- YTD
- -14.68%
- 1Y
- -24.96%
- 3Y*
- -10.10%
- 5Y*
- -5.74%
- 10Y*
- -11.55%
- ALL TIME*
- -11.99%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $21.45M | $15.41M | $22.03M | |
| $383.13M | $302.59M | $251.83M |
MSFD vs. RWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MSFD Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares | -1.78% | -13.36% | -7.86% | -35.90% | 3.88% |
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | -14.68% | -9.40% | -5.91% | -10.43% | 0.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between MSFD and RWM is 0.17, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.17 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 7, 2022 | 0.37 |
The correlation between MSFD and RWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (1 year) to 0.37 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
MSFD vs. RWM — Risk / Return Rank
MSFD
RWM
MSFD vs. RWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares (MSFD) and ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM). 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.
| MSFD | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 0.81 | +0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.36 | -0.85 | +1.21 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.20 | -1.37 | +2.57 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MSFD vs. RWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MSFD drawdown since its inception was -59.90%, smaller than the maximum RWM drawdown of -95.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFD and RWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MSFD | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.90% | -95.61% | +35.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.54% | -27.57% | +1.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -40.50% | -43.12% | +2.62% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -43.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -72.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -55.70% | -95.45% | +39.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.72% | -74.20% | +32.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.87% | 17.16% | -9.29% |
Volatility
MSFD vs. RWM - Volatility Comparison
Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares (MSFD) has a higher volatility of 18.10% compared to ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) at 3.70%. This indicates that MSFD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MSFD | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 18.10% | 3.70% | +14.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 27.83% | 14.08% | +13.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.03% | 19.30% | +12.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.55% | 22.50% | +5.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.55% | 23.09% | +4.46% |
MSFD vs. RWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
MSFD has a 1.06% expense ratio, which is higher than RWM's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
MSFD vs. RWM - Dividend Comparison
MSFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.02%, more than RWM's 3.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MSFD Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares | 4.02% | 3.33% | 4.46% | 4.43% | 0.74% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | 3.74% | 3.97% | 6.03% | 4.78% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.20% | 1.55% | 0.87% | 0.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MSFD and RWM have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MSFD has higher volatility (18.10%) compared to RWM (3.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSFD dropped -59.90% vs RWM's -95.61%.
On 3-year performance, RWM leads with -10.10% vs -10.70% for MSFD. On fees, RWM is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, RWM has been the lower-risk option at 3.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, RWM has performed better with a -10.10% return vs -10.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RWM is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.06% for MSFD.
MSFD has the higher dividend yield at 4.02%, compared with 3.74% for RWM.
MSFD tracks Microsoft Corporation (-100%), while RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%). They also come from different issuers: Direxion and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.06% for MSFD and 0.95% for RWM.
MSFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.30 vs -1.22), 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 MSFD and RWM
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