RWM vs. MSFD

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and MSFD (Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares) are both Inverse Equities funds - RWM tracks the Russell 2000 (-100%) while MSFD tracks the Microsoft Corporation (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RWM returned -11.37%/yr vs -3.30%/yr for MSFD. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RWM charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.06%/yr for MSFD.

Performance

RWM vs. MSFD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares (MSFD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a -15.79% return, which is significantly lower than MSFD's 21.74% return.

RWM

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: -0.36%
• 6M: -10.78%
• YTD: -15.79%
• 1Y: -22.93%
• 3Y*: -11.37%
• 5Y*: -6.34%
• 10Y*: -11.66%

MSFD

• 1D: 1.62%
• 1M: 0.88%
• 6M: 18.34%
• YTD: 21.74%
• 1Y: 27.86%
• 3Y*: -3.30%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RWM vs. MSFD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	-15.79%	-9.40%	-5.91%	-10.43%	0.48%
MSFD Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares	21.74%	-13.36%	-7.86%	-35.90%	3.88%

Correlation

The correlation between RWM and MSFD is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 7, 2022	0.37

Over the past year, the correlation between RWM and MSFD has dropped to 0.15 - well below their long-term average of 0.37, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

RWM vs. MSFD — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWM

RWM Risk / Return Rank: 1
RWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
RWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
RWM Omega Ratio Rank: 2
RWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
RWM Martin Ratio Rank: 1

MSFD

MSFD Risk / Return Rank: 34
MSFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
MSFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
MSFD Omega Ratio Rank: 37
MSFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
MSFD Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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. MSFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares (MSFD). 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	MSFD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.19	1.02	-2.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.65	1.62	-3.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	1.20	-0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.83	1.20	-2.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.42	3.86	-5.28

RWM vs. MSFD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWM Sharpe Ratio is -1.19, which is lower than the MSFD Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWM and MSFD, 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. MSFD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.61%, which is greater than MSFD's maximum drawdown of -59.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and MSFD.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWM	MSFD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-95.61%	-59.90%	-35.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.57%	-23.25%	-4.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.12%	-40.50%	-2.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-72.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.51%	-45.09%	-50.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.14%	-41.65%	-32.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.16%	7.25%	+8.91%

Volatility

RWM vs. MSFD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) is 3.80%, while Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares (MSFD) has a volatility of 10.51%. This indicates that RWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSFD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWM	MSFD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.80%	10.51%	-6.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.15%	24.03%	-9.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.39%	27.32%	-7.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.58%	26.39%	-3.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.08%	26.39%	-3.31%

RWM vs. MSFD - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than MSFD's 1.06% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWM vs. MSFD - Dividend Comparison

RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.79%, more than MSFD's 3.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MSFD Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares	3.25%	3.33%	4.46%	4.43%	0.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	3.79%	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 MSFD in my portfolio?

RWM and MSFD have a correlation of 0.15, 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 MSFD?

MSFD has higher volatility (10.51%) compared to RWM (3.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.61% vs MSFD's -59.90%.

Which ETF is better, RWM or MSFD?

On 3-year performance, MSFD leads with -3.30% vs -11.37% for RWM. On fees, RWM is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, RWM has been the lower-risk option at 3.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWM or MSFD?

Over the 3-year period, MSFD has performed better with a -3.30% return vs -11.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWM or MSFD?

RWM is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.06% for MSFD.

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

RWM has the higher dividend yield at 3.79%, compared with 3.25% for MSFD.

What is the main difference between RWM and MSFD?

RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%), while MSFD tracks Microsoft Corporation (-100%). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RWM and 1.06% for MSFD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.02 vs -1.19), 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.