RWM vs. CARD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and CARD (Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) are both Inverse Equities funds - RWM tracks the Russell 2000 (-100%) while CARD tracks the Prime Auto Industry Index - Benchmark TR Net (--300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RWM returned -27.19% vs -30.65% for CARD. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

RWM vs. CARD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (CARD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a -16.29% return, which is significantly lower than CARD's 5.96% return.

RWM

• 1D: 0.89%
• 1M: -3.67%
• YTD: -16.29%
• 6M: -14.25%
• 1Y: -27.19%
• 3Y*: -13.21%
• 5Y*: -5.30%
• 10Y*: -12.35%

CARD

• 1D: 2.92%
• 1M: 3.56%
• YTD: 5.96%
• 6M: 16.67%
• 1Y: -30.65%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RWM vs. CARD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	-16.29%	-9.40%	-5.91%	-6.89%
CARD Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	5.96%	-60.21%	-58.19%	-32.77%

Correlation

The correlation between RWM and CARD is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 28, 2023	0.74

The correlation between RWM and CARD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RWM vs. CARD — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWM

RWM Risk / Return Rank: 0
RWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
RWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
RWM Omega Ratio Rank: 1
RWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
RWM Martin Ratio Rank: 0

CARD

CARD Risk / Return Rank: 5
CARD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
CARD Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
CARD Omega Ratio Rank: 6
CARD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
CARD Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

RWM vs. CARD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (CARD). 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.

	RWM	CARD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.39	-0.44	-0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.01	-0.25	-1.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	0.97	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.98	-0.66	-0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.74	-0.97	-0.77

RWM vs. CARD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWM Sharpe Ratio is -1.39, which is lower than the CARD Sharpe Ratio of -0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWM and CARD, 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

RWM vs. CARD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.58%, roughly equal to the maximum CARD drawdown of -93.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and CARD.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWM	CARD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-95.58%	-93.51%	-2.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.70%	-46.42%	+18.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-42.69%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.69%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-74.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.54%	-92.04%	-3.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.08%	-68.71%	-5.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.76%	31.50%	-15.74%

Volatility

RWM vs. CARD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) is 6.51%, while Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (CARD) has a volatility of 24.36%. This indicates that RWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CARD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWM	CARD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.51%	24.36%	-17.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.28%	52.63%	-38.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.61%	70.25%	-50.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.64%	80.74%	-58.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.14%	80.74%	-57.60%

RWM vs. CARD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both RWM and CARD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

RWM vs. CARD - Dividend Comparison

RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.24%, while CARD has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CARD Max Auto Industry -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	4.24%	3.97%	6.03%	4.78%	0.39%	0.00%	0.20%	1.55%	0.87%	0.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWM and CARD in my portfolio?

RWM and CARD have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RWM or CARD?

CARD has higher volatility (24.36%) compared to RWM (6.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.58% vs CARD's -93.51%.

Which ETF is better, RWM or CARD?

On 1-year performance, RWM leads with -27.19% vs -30.65% for CARD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, RWM has been the lower-risk option at 6.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWM or CARD?

Over the 1-year period, RWM has performed better with a -27.19% return vs -30.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWM or CARD?

RWM and CARD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWM or CARD?

RWM has the higher dividend yield at 4.24%, compared with 0.00% for CARD.

What is the main difference between RWM and CARD?

RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%), while CARD tracks Prime Auto Industry Index - Benchmark TR Net (--300%). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Max.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CARD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.44 vs -1.39), 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.