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

Performance

PFRL vs. IWMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF (PFRL) 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, PFRL achieves a 1.96% return, which is significantly lower than IWMI's 13.36% return.


PFRL

1D
0.09%
1M
0.68%
YTD
1.96%
6M
2.91%
1Y
6.46%
3Y*
8.85%
5Y*
10Y*

IWMI

1D
-1.02%
1M
3.18%
YTD
13.36%
6M
13.24%
1Y
34.38%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PFRL vs. IWMI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
PFRL
PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF
1.96%6.25%4.74%
IWMI
NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF
13.36%14.97%6.61%

Correlation

The correlation between PFRL and IWMI is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2024

0.37

PFRL vs. IWMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PFRL
IWMI

Industrials

97.9%
16.6%

Communication Services

88.1%
2.4%

Energy

11.9%
6.5%

Basic Materials

-

5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

8.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.6%

Financial Services

-

16.0%

Healthcare

-

17.9%

Real Estate

-

6.3%

Technology

-

15.1%

Utilities

-

3.1%

Industrials

PFRL
97.9%
IWMI
16.6%

Communication Services

PFRL
88.1%
IWMI
2.4%

Energy

PFRL
11.9%
IWMI
6.5%

Basic Materials

PFRL

-

IWMI
5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

PFRL

-

IWMI
8.6%

Consumer Defensive

PFRL

-

IWMI
2.6%

Financial Services

PFRL

-

IWMI
16.0%

Healthcare

PFRL

-

IWMI
17.9%

Real Estate

PFRL

-

IWMI
6.3%

Technology

PFRL

-

IWMI
15.1%

Utilities

PFRL

-

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

PFRL vs. IWMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

PFRL
PFRL Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
PFRL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PFRL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
PFRL Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
PFRL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
PFRL Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

IWMI
IWMI Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
IWMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWMI Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
IWMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWMI Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

PFRL vs. IWMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF (PFRL) 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.


PFRLIWMIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.60

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.73

1.41

+0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.17

4.11

+1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.58

17.09

+0.50

PFRL vs. IWMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PFRL Sharpe Ratio is 3.35, which is higher than the IWMI Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PFRL and IWMI, 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


PFRLIWMIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.35

2.33

+1.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.67

1.04

+0.62

Drawdowns

PFRL vs. IWMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PFRL drawdown since its inception was -8.83%, smaller than the maximum IWMI drawdown of -23.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFRL and IWMI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PFRLIWMIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.83%

-23.88%

+15.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.25%

-8.40%

+7.15%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.03%

-1.02%

+0.99%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.44%

-4.12%

+3.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.37%

2.02%

-1.65%

Volatility

PFRL vs. IWMI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF (PFRL) is 0.42%, while NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) has a volatility of 4.31%. This indicates that PFRL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PFRLIWMIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.42%

4.31%

-3.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.58%

10.74%

-9.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.94%

14.84%

-12.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.86%

17.89%

-13.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.86%

17.89%

-13.03%

PFRL vs. IWMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

PFRL has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than IWMI's 0.68% expense ratio.


Dividends

PFRL vs. IWMI - Dividend Comparison

PFRL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.83%, less than IWMI's 13.52% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
IWMI
NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF
13.52%14.05%8.78%0.00%0.00%
PFRL
PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF
6.83%7.34%8.96%9.84%3.55%

Frequently Asked Questions


PFRL and IWMI have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWMI has higher volatility (4.31%) compared to PFRL (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFRL dropped -8.83% vs IWMI's -23.88%.

On 1-year performance, IWMI leads with 34.38% vs 6.46% for PFRL. On fees, IWMI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, PFRL has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IWMI has performed better with a 34.38% return vs 6.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWMI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for PFRL.

IWMI has the higher dividend yield at 13.52%, compared with 6.83% for PFRL.

PFRL is categorized as Bank Loan, while IWMI is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for PFRL and 0.68% for IWMI.

PFRL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.35 vs 2.33), 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 PFRL 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