PFRL vs. IWMI
PFRL (PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF) and IWMI (NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PFRL is a Bank Loan fund actively managed by PGIM, while IWMI is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Neos. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PFRL returned 6.46% vs 34.38% for IWMI. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PFRL charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for IWMI.
Performance
PFRL vs. IWMI - Performance Comparison
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*
- —
PFRL vs. IWMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
Communication Services
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
PFRL
IWMI
Communication Services
PFRL
IWMI
Energy
PFRL
IWMI
Basic Materials
PFRL
-
IWMI
Consumer Cyclical
PFRL
-
IWMI
Consumer Defensive
PFRL
-
IWMI
Financial Services
PFRL
-
IWMI
Healthcare
PFRL
-
IWMI
Real Estate
PFRL
-
IWMI
Technology
PFRL
-
IWMI
Utilities
PFRL
-
IWMI
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
PFRL
IWMI
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.
| PFRL | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PFRL | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| PFRL | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.03% | -1.02% | +0.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.44% | -4.12% | +3.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| PFRL | IWMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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