RWM vs. SPDN
RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and SPDN (Direxion Daily S&P 500 Bear 1x Shares) are both Inverse Equities funds - RWM tracks the Russell 2000 (-100%) while SPDN tracks the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWM returned -12.35%/yr vs -12.66%/yr for SPDN. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RWM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for SPDN.
Performance
RWM vs. SPDN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a -16.29% return, which is significantly lower than SPDN's -6.10% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with RWM having a -12.35% annualized return and SPDN not far behind at -12.66%.
RWM
- 1D
- 0.89%
- 1M
- -3.67%
- YTD
- -16.29%
- 6M
- -14.25%
- 1Y
- -27.19%
- 3Y*
- -13.21%
- 5Y*
- -5.30%
- 10Y*
- -12.35%
SPDN
- 1D
- 0.69%
- 1M
- 0.80%
- YTD
- -6.10%
- 6M
- -5.09%
- 1Y
- -14.93%
- 3Y*
- -11.95%
- 5Y*
- -8.36%
- 10Y*
- -12.66%
RWM vs. SPDN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | -16.29% | -9.40% | -5.91% | -10.43% | 18.34% | -17.90% | -31.04% | -19.83% | 11.57% | -13.61% |
SPDN Direxion Daily S&P 500 Bear 1x Shares | -6.10% | -11.09% | -12.88% | -15.04% | 18.63% | -23.72% | -24.56% | -21.94% | 5.41% | -17.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between RWM and SPDN is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2016 | 0.81 |
The correlation between RWM and SPDN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. SPDN — Risk / Return Rank
RWM
SPDN
RWM vs. SPDN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and Direxion Daily S&P 500 Bear 1x Shares (SPDN). 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 | SPDN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.78 | 0.81 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.98 | -0.93 | -0.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.74 | -1.75 | +0.01 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RWM vs. SPDN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.58%, which is greater than SPDN's maximum drawdown of -75.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and SPDN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RWM | SPDN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -95.58% | -75.31% | -20.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.70% | -16.05% | -11.65% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -42.69% | -38.24% | -4.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.69% | -43.85% | +1.16% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -74.31% | -75.31% | +1.00% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -95.54% | -74.71% | -20.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -74.08% | -48.66% | -25.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.76% | 9.44% | +6.32% |
Volatility
RWM vs. SPDN - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) has a higher volatility of 6.51% compared to Direxion Daily S&P 500 Bear 1x Shares (SPDN) at 4.51%. This indicates that RWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SPDN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RWM | SPDN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.51% | 4.51% | +2.00% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.28% | 9.82% | +4.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.61% | 12.59% | +7.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.64% | 16.95% | +5.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.14% | 18.04% | +5.10% |
RWM vs. SPDN - Expense Ratio Comparison
RWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SPDN's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
RWM vs. SPDN - Dividend Comparison
RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.24%, more than SPDN's 4.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | 4.24% | 3.97% | 6.03% | 4.78% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.20% | 1.55% | 0.87% | 0.07% |
SPDN Direxion Daily S&P 500 Bear 1x Shares | 4.02% | 4.06% | 5.32% | 5.84% | 0.96% | 0.00% | 0.10% | 1.89% | 1.24% | 0.42% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RWM and SPDN have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RWM has higher volatility (6.51%) compared to SPDN (4.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.58% vs SPDN's -75.31%.
On 10-year performance, RWM leads with -12.35% vs -12.66% for SPDN. On fees, SPDN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, SPDN has been the lower-risk option at 4.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, RWM has performed better with a -12.35% return vs -12.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SPDN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RWM.
RWM has the higher dividend yield at 4.24%, compared with 4.02% for SPDN.
RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%), while SPDN tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RWM and 0.50% for SPDN.
SPDN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.19 vs -1.39), 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 SPDN
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