PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NFLW vs. IWMI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NFLW vs. IWMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) and NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NFLW achieves a -16.74% return, which is significantly lower than IWMI's 14.60% return.


NFLW

1D
0.05%
1M
-8.52%
YTD
-16.74%
6M
-25.90%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

IWMI

1D
1.10%
1M
3.08%
YTD
14.60%
6M
13.67%
1Y
35.91%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NFLW vs. IWMI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
NFLW
Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF
-16.74%-29.02%
IWMI
NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF
14.60%17.70%

Correlation

The correlation between NFLW and IWMI is 0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 2025

0.03

NFLW vs. IWMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
NFLW
IWMI

Communication Services

25.9%
2.4%

Basic Materials

-

5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

8.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.6%

Energy

-

6.5%

Financial Services

-

16.0%

Healthcare

-

17.9%

Industrials

-

16.6%

Real Estate

-

6.3%

Technology

-

15.1%

Utilities

-

3.1%

Communication Services

NFLW
25.9%
IWMI
2.4%

Basic Materials

NFLW

-

IWMI
5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

NFLW

-

IWMI
8.6%

Consumer Defensive

NFLW

-

IWMI
2.6%

Energy

NFLW

-

IWMI
6.5%

Financial Services

NFLW

-

IWMI
16.0%

Healthcare

NFLW

-

IWMI
17.9%

Industrials

NFLW

-

IWMI
16.6%

Real Estate

NFLW

-

IWMI
6.3%

Technology

NFLW

-

IWMI
15.1%

Utilities

NFLW

-

IWMI
3.1%

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

NFLW vs. IWMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

NFLW

IWMI
IWMI Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
IWMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWMI Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
IWMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWMI Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

NFLW vs. IWMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

NFLW vs. IWMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NFLWIWMIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.43

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-1.05

1.08

-2.13

Drawdowns

NFLW vs. IWMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NFLW drawdown since its inception was -50.73%, which is greater than IWMI's maximum drawdown of -23.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NFLW and IWMI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NFLWIWMIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.73%

-23.88%

-26.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.40%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-46.97%

0.00%

-46.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-26.93%

-4.11%

-22.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.02%

Volatility

NFLW vs. IWMI - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NFLWIWMIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.78%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

40.26%

14.85%

+25.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

40.26%

17.89%

+22.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

40.26%

17.89%

+22.37%

NFLW vs. IWMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

NFLW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than IWMI's 0.68% expense ratio.


Dividends

NFLW vs. IWMI - Dividend Comparison

NFLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 73.20%, more than IWMI's 13.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
IWMI
NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF
13.38%14.05%8.78%
NFLW
Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF
73.20%38.89%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


NFLW and IWMI have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IWMI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IWMI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for NFLW.

NFLW has the higher dividend yield at 73.20%, compared with 13.38% for IWMI.

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for NFLW and 0.68% for IWMI.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NFLW 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