PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RWM vs. DOG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RWM vs. DOG

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and DOG (ProShares Short Dow30) are both Inverse Equities funds from ProShares - RWM tracks the Russell 2000 (-100%) while DOG tracks the DJ Industrial Average (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWM returned -11.97%/yr vs -11.28%/yr for DOG. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

RWM vs. DOG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and ProShares Short Dow30 (DOG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a -15.00% return, which is significantly lower than DOG's -5.22% return. Over the past 10 years, RWM has underperformed DOG with an annualized return of -11.97%, while DOG has yielded a comparatively higher -11.28% annualized return.

RWM

1D
-0.86%
1M
-4.02%
YTD
-15.00%
6M
-15.34%
1Y
-28.11%
3Y*
-12.50%
5Y*
-5.55%
10Y*
-11.97%

DOG

1D
-0.49%
1M
-3.31%
YTD
-5.22%
6M
-5.93%
1Y
-14.18%
3Y*
-8.62%
5Y*
-5.63%
10Y*
-11.28%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RWM vs. DOG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RWM
ProShares Short Russell2000		-15.00%-9.40%-5.91%-10.43%18.34%-17.90%-31.04%-19.83%11.57%-13.61%
DOG
ProShares Short Dow30		-5.22%-8.40%-5.62%-7.05%5.67%-19.21%-20.45%-18.43%3.55%-21.51%

Correlation

The correlation between RWM and DOG is 0.78, 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

0.78

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.77

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.80

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2007

0.81

The correlation between RWM and DOG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWM vs. DOG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
RWM
DOG

Financial Services

80.6%
81.2%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

RWM
80.6%
DOG
81.2%

Basic Materials

RWM

-

DOG

-

Communication Services

RWM

-

DOG

-

Consumer Cyclical

RWM

-

DOG

-

Consumer Defensive

RWM

-

DOG

-

Energy

RWM

-

DOG

-

Healthcare

RWM

-

DOG

-

Industrials

RWM

-

DOG

-

Real Estate

RWM

-

DOG

-

Technology

RWM

-

DOG

-

Utilities

RWM

-

DOG

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

ProShares Short Russell2000

ProShares Short Dow30

Often compared with RWM:
RWM vs. IWMRWM vs. QIDRWM vs. TWMRWM vs. SPYRWM vs. PSQRWM vs. QQQRWM vs. SH
Often compared with DOG:
DOG vs. DXDDOG vs. SHDOG vs. PSQDOG vs. DIADOG vs. UDOWDOG vs. TZADOG vs. SPY

Return for Risk

RWM vs. DOG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RWM
RWM Risk / Return Rank: 00
Overall Rank
RWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 00
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWM Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
RWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 00
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWM Martin Ratio Rank: 00
Martin Ratio Rank
DOG
DOG Risk / Return Rank: 11
Overall Rank
DOG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DOG Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
DOG Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
DOG Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
Calmar Ratio Rank
DOG Martin Ratio Rank: 11
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.

RWM vs. DOG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and ProShares Short Dow30 (DOG). 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.

RWMDOGDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-1.48

-1.18

-0.31

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-2.14

-1.61

-0.54

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.77

0.82

-0.05

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-1.00

-0.98

-0.03

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-1.70

-1.62

-0.09

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RWM vs. DOG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWM Sharpe Ratio is -1.48, which is comparable to the DOG Sharpe Ratio of -1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWM and DOG, 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

RWMDOGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-1.48

-1.18

-0.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.25

-0.38

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.52

-0.65

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.49

-0.57

+0.08

Drawdowns

RWM vs. DOG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.47%, roughly equal to the maximum DOG drawdown of -92.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and DOG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RWMDOGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-95.47%

-92.69%

-2.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-27.26%

-14.63%

-12.63%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-41.38%

-28.77%

-12.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.38%

-33.99%

-7.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.72%

-70.79%

-2.93%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-95.47%

-92.69%

-2.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-74.04%

-66.39%

-7.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

16.63%

8.85%

+7.78%

Volatility

RWM vs. DOG - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) has a higher volatility of 5.68% compared to ProShares Short Dow30 (DOG) at 3.01%. This indicates that RWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DOG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RWMDOGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.68%

3.01%

+2.67%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.50%

9.33%

+4.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.01%

12.07%

+6.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.55%

14.78%

+7.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.11%

17.49%

+5.62%

RWM vs. DOG - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

RWM vs. DOG - Dividend Comparison

RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.18%, more than DOG's 3.53% yield.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
DOG
ProShares Short Dow30		3.53%3.65%5.72%4.54%0.41%0.00%0.14%1.54%0.86%0.04%
RWM
ProShares Short Russell2000		4.18%3.97%6.03%4.78%0.39%0.00%0.20%1.55%0.87%0.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

RWM and DOG have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RWM has higher volatility (5.68%) compared to DOG (3.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.47% vs DOG's -92.69%.

On 10-year performance, DOG leads with -11.28% vs -11.97% for RWM. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, DOG has been the lower-risk option at 3.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DOG has performed better with a -11.28% return vs -11.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

RWM has the higher dividend yield at 4.18%, compared with 3.53% for DOG.

RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%), while DOG tracks DJ Industrial Average (-100%).

DOG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.18 vs -1.48), 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 RWM and DOG

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