RWM vs. PG

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) is Inverse Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 (-100%), while PG (The Procter & Gamble Company) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, RWM returned -11.66%/yr vs 8.35%/yr for PG. At a correlation of -0.33, they often move in opposite directions.

Performance

RWM vs. PG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and The Procter & Gamble Company (PG). 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 PG's 3.43% return. Over the past 10 years, RWM has underperformed PG with an annualized return of -11.66%, while PG has yielded a comparatively higher 8.35% 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%

PG

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -2.36%
• 6M: 2.76%
• YTD: 3.43%
• 1Y: -2.26%
• 3Y*: 1.71%
• 5Y*: 3.58%
• 10Y*: 8.35%

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

RWM vs. PG - 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%
PG The Procter & Gamble Company	3.43%	-12.26%	17.25%	-0.86%	-5.05%	20.52%	14.15%	39.70%	3.57%	12.69%

Correlation

The correlation between RWM and PG is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.01
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.06
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.15
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2007	-0.33

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between RWM and PG has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.33 to -0.01, meaning they move in opposite directions less often than they have historically.

Return for Risk

RWM vs. PG — 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

PG

PG Risk / Return Rank: 38
PG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
PG Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
PG Omega Ratio Rank: 33
PG Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
PG Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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. PG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and The Procter & Gamble Company (PG). 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	PG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.19	-0.12	-1.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.65	-0.03	-1.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	1.00	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.83	-0.15	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.42	-0.26	-1.16

RWM vs. PG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWM Sharpe Ratio is -1.19, which is lower than the PG Sharpe Ratio of -0.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWM and PG, 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. PG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.61%, which is greater than PG's maximum drawdown of -54.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and PG.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWM	PG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-95.61%	-54.25%	-41.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.57%	-15.52%	-12.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.12%	-21.15%	-21.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.12%	-23.77%	-19.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-72.51%	-23.77%	-48.74%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.51%	-15.34%	-80.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.14%	-12.17%	-61.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.16%	8.78%	+7.38%

Volatility

RWM vs. PG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) is 3.80%, while The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) has a volatility of 7.05%. This indicates that RWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWM	PG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.80%	7.05%	-3.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.15%	15.75%	-1.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.39%	19.61%	-0.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.58%	18.04%	+4.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.08%	19.14%	+3.94%

Dividends

RWM vs. PG - Dividend Comparison

RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.79%, more than PG's 2.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PG The Procter & Gamble Company	2.92%	2.91%	2.36%	2.55%	2.38%	2.08%	2.24%	2.37%	3.09%	2.98%	3.18%	3.31%
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

Can I hold both RWM and PG in my portfolio?

RWM and PG have a correlation of -0.01, 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 PG?

PG has higher volatility (7.05%) compared to RWM (3.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.61% vs PG's -54.25%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.12 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.