RWM vs. SH
Compare and contrast key facts about ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and ProShares Short S&P500 (SH).
RWM and SH are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. RWM is a passively managed fund by ProShares that tracks the performance of the Russell 2000 (-100%). It was launched on Jan 23, 2007. SH is a passively managed fund by ProShares that tracks the performance of the S&P 500 (-100%). It was launched on Jun 19, 2006. Both RWM and SH are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: RWM or SH.
Key characteristics
| RWM | SH | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 3.97% | -3.18% |
| 1Y Return | -7.12% | -11.60% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 2.17% | -5.89% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | -10.11% | -13.00% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | -10.12% | -12.01% |
| Sharpe Ratio | -0.36 | -1.00 |
| Daily Std Dev | 19.89% | 11.55% |
| Max Drawdown | -94.51% | -93.02% |
| Current Drawdown | -93.50% | -92.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between RWM and SH is 0.86, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
RWM vs. SH - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a 3.97% return, which is significantly higher than SH's -3.18% return. Over the past 10 years, RWM has outperformed SH with an annualized return of -10.12%, while SH has yielded a comparatively lower -12.01% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
RWM vs. SH - Expense Ratio Comparison
RWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SH's 0.90% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
RWM vs. SH - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and ProShares Short S&P500 (SH). 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.
Dividends
RWM vs. SH - Dividend Comparison
RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.17%, less than SH's 5.77% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | 5.17% | 4.78% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.20% | 1.55% | 0.87% | 0.07% |
SH ProShares Short S&P500 | 5.77% | 5.37% | 0.32% | 0.00% | 0.16% | 1.76% | 1.01% | 0.06% |
Drawdowns
RWM vs. SH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -94.51%, roughly equal to the maximum SH drawdown of -93.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and SH. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
RWM vs. SH - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) has a higher volatility of 5.41% compared to ProShares Short S&P500 (SH) at 3.85%. This indicates that RWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.