RWM vs. SEF

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and SEF (ProShares Short Financials) are both Inverse Equities funds from ProShares - RWM tracks the Russell 2000 (-100%) while SEF tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Financials Index (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWM returned -11.48%/yr vs -12.22%/yr for SEF. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

RWM vs. SEF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a -16.04% return, which is significantly lower than SEF's -2.97% return. Over the past 10 years, RWM has outperformed SEF with an annualized return of -11.48%, while SEF has yielded a comparatively lower -12.22% annualized return.

RWM

• 1D: -1.60%
• 1M: 0.82%
• 6M: -10.93%
• YTD: -16.04%
• 1Y: -26.16%
• 3Y*: -11.17%
• 5Y*: -6.29%
• 10Y*: -11.48%
• ALL TIME*: -12.05%

SEF

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: -2.73%
• 6M: -4.74%
• YTD: -2.97%
• 1Y: -7.57%
• 3Y*: -12.14%
• 5Y*: -7.56%
• 10Y*: -12.22%
• ALL TIME*: -13.90%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	$356.63M	$306.99M	$253.47M
SEF ProShares Short Financials	$316.98K	$220.26K	$247.07K

RWM vs. SEF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	-16.04%	-9.40%	-5.91%	-10.43%	18.34%	-17.90%	-31.04%	-19.83%	11.57%	-13.61%
SEF ProShares Short Financials	-2.97%	-9.82%	-17.81%	-8.81%	11.85%	-27.02%	-16.93%	-23.51%	10.34%	-17.12%

Correlation

The correlation between RWM and SEF is 0.53, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.66
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.75
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2008	0.79

Over the past year, the correlation between RWM and SEF has dropped to 0.53 - well below their long-term average of 0.79, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

RWM vs. SEF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWM	SEF
Financial Services	88.7%	75.3%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

RWM vs. SEF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks 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: 0
RWM Martin Ratio Rank: 0

SEF

SEF Risk / Return Rank: 5
SEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
SEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
SEF Omega Ratio Rank: 5
SEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
SEF Martin Ratio Rank: 3

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RWM vs. SEF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and ProShares Short Financials (SEF). 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	SEF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.37	-0.52	-0.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.94	-0.68	-1.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.79	0.92	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-1.01	-0.48	-0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.68	-1.17	-0.51

RWM vs. SEF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWM Sharpe Ratio is -1.37, which is lower than the SEF Sharpe Ratio of -0.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWM and SEF, 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. SEF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.61%, roughly equal to the maximum SEF drawdown of -96.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and SEF.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWM	SEF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-95.61%	-96.53%	+0.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.97%	-15.98%	-9.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.12%	-39.77%	-3.35%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.12%	-41.98%	-1.14%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-72.51%	-73.23%	+0.72%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.52%	-96.52%	+1.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.21%	-82.82%	+8.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.24%	6.48%	+10.76%

Volatility

RWM vs. SEF - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) has a higher volatility of 4.04% compared to ProShares Short Financials (SEF) at 3.84%. This indicates that RWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SEF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWM	SEF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	3.84%	+0.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.08%	11.03%	+3.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.24%	14.55%	+4.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.52%	17.92%	+4.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.10%	20.46%	+2.64%

RWM vs. SEF - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

RWM vs. SEF - Dividend Comparison

RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.80%, more than SEF's 3.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	3.80%	3.97%	6.03%	4.78%	0.39%	0.00%	0.20%	1.55%	0.87%	0.07%
SEF ProShares Short Financials	3.46%	4.33%	5.72%	4.43%	0.39%	0.00%	0.12%	1.25%	0.41%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWM and SEF in my portfolio?

RWM and SEF have a correlation of 0.53, 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 SEF?

RWM has higher volatility (4.04%) compared to SEF (3.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.61% vs SEF's -96.53%.

Which ETF is better, RWM or SEF?

On 10-year performance, RWM leads with -11.48% vs -12.22% for SEF. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, SEF has been the lower-risk option at 3.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWM or SEF?

Over the 10-year period, RWM has performed better with a -11.48% return vs -12.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWM or SEF?

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

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

RWM has the higher dividend yield at 3.80%, compared with 3.46% for SEF.

What is the main difference between RWM and SEF?

RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%), while SEF tracks Dow Jones U.S. Financials Index (-100%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.52 vs -1.37), 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.