RWM vs. NOBL
RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWM is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 (-100%), while NOBL is a Dividend fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWM returned -11.66%/yr vs 9.56%/yr for NOBL. At a correlation of -0.74, they often move in opposite directions. RWM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for NOBL.
Performance
RWM vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a -15.79% return, which is significantly lower than NOBL's 9.33% return. Over the past 10 years, RWM has underperformed NOBL with an annualized return of -11.66%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively higher 9.56% annualized 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%
NOBL
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- 1.76%
- 6M
- 5.17%
- YTD
- 9.33%
- 1Y
- 12.04%
- 3Y*
- 8.22%
- 5Y*
- 6.45%
- 10Y*
- 9.56%
RWM vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | -15.79% | -9.40% | -5.91% | -10.43% | 18.34% | -17.90% | -31.04% | -19.83% | 11.57% | -13.61% |
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 9.33% | 6.84% | 6.72% | 8.09% | -6.52% | 25.46% | 8.35% | 27.39% | -3.26% | 21.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between RWM and NOBL is -0.48, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.48 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.71 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2013 | -0.74 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between RWM and NOBL has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.74 to -0.48, meaning they move in opposite directions less often than they have historically.
RWM vs. NOBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RWM
NOBL
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
RWM
NOBL
Basic Materials
RWM
-
NOBL
Communication Services
RWM
-
NOBL
-
Consumer Cyclical
RWM
-
NOBL
Consumer Defensive
RWM
-
NOBL
Energy
RWM
-
NOBL
Healthcare
RWM
-
NOBL
Industrials
RWM
-
NOBL
Real Estate
RWM
-
NOBL
Technology
RWM
-
NOBL
Utilities
RWM
-
NOBL
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
RWM vs. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank
RWM
NOBL
RWM vs. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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 | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.82 | 1.18 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.83 | 1.33 | -2.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.42 | 3.36 | -4.78 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RWM vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.61%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and NOBL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RWM | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -95.61% | -35.43% | -60.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.57% | -9.11% | -18.46% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -43.12% | -15.36% | -27.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -43.12% | -17.92% | -25.20% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -72.51% | -35.43% | -37.08% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -95.51% | -2.44% | -93.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -74.14% | -3.47% | -70.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.16% | 3.59% | +12.57% |
Volatility
RWM vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) is 3.80%, while ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) has a volatility of 4.11%. This indicates that RWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RWM | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.80% | 4.11% | -0.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.15% | 8.54% | +5.61% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.39% | 11.67% | +7.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.58% | 14.43% | +8.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.08% | 16.60% | +6.48% |
RWM vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison
RWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
RWM vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison
RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.79%, more than NOBL's 2.07% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 2.07% | 2.14% | 2.05% | 2.09% | 1.94% | 1.89% | 2.14% | 1.89% | 2.37% | 1.74% | 2.13% | 2.02% |
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | 3.79% | 3.97% | 6.03% | 4.78% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.20% | 1.55% | 0.87% | 0.07% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RWM and NOBL have a correlation of -0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NOBL has higher volatility (4.11%) compared to RWM (3.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.61% vs NOBL's -35.43%.
On 10-year performance, NOBL leads with 9.56% vs -11.66% for RWM. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% 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.
Over the 10-year period, NOBL has performed better with a 9.56% return vs -11.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RWM.
RWM has the higher dividend yield at 3.79%, compared with 2.07% for NOBL.
RWM is categorized as Inverse Equities, while NOBL is Dividend. RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%), while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RWM and 0.35% for NOBL.
NOBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.04 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.
Find the right allocation for RWM and NOBL
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