RWM vs. TWM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and TWM (ProShares UltraShort Russell2000) are both exchange-traded funds - RWM is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 (-100%), while TWM is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 (-200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWM returned -12.35%/yr vs -28.49%/yr for TWM. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

RWM vs. TWM - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a -16.29% return, which is significantly higher than TWM's -32.09% return. Over the past 10 years, RWM has outperformed TWM with an annualized return of -12.35%, while TWM has yielded a comparatively lower -28.49% annualized return.

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%

TWM

• 1D: 1.98%
• 1M: -7.68%
• YTD: -32.09%
• 6M: -28.69%
• 1Y: -50.37%
• 3Y*: -30.94%
• 5Y*: -17.34%
• 10Y*: -28.49%

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

RWM vs. TWM - 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%
TWM ProShares UltraShort Russell2000	-32.09%	-24.71%	-19.35%	-26.84%	28.43%	-35.43%	-60.01%	-38.40%	19.15%	-26.36%

Correlation

The correlation between RWM and TWM is 1.00 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.00
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	1.00
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.00
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	1.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2007	0.99

The correlation between RWM and TWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWM vs. TWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWM	TWM
Financial Services	96.0%	100.3%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

RWM vs. TWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments 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: 1
RWM Martin Ratio Rank: 0

TWM

TWM Risk / Return Rank: 0
TWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
TWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
TWM Omega Ratio Rank: 1
TWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
TWM Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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. TWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM). 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	TWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.39	-1.28	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.01	-2.08	+0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	0.78	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.98	-0.99	0.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.74	-1.64	-0.10

RWM vs. TWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWM Sharpe Ratio is -1.39, which is comparable to the TWM Sharpe Ratio of -1.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWM and TWM, 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. TWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.58%, roughly equal to the maximum TWM drawdown of -99.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and TWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWM	TWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-95.58%	-99.94%	+4.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.70%	-51.15%	+23.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-42.69%	-74.07%	+31.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.69%	-76.44%	+33.75%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-74.31%	-96.79%	+22.48%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.54%	-99.93%	+4.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.08%	-87.29%	+13.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.76%	30.89%	-15.13%

Volatility

RWM vs. TWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) is 6.51%, while ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM) has a volatility of 13.21%. This indicates that RWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWM	TWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.51%	13.21%	-6.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.28%	28.79%	-14.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.61%	39.41%	-19.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.64%	45.25%	-22.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.14%	45.84%	-22.70%

RWM vs. TWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

RWM vs. TWM - Dividend Comparison

RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.24%, less than TWM's 6.67% 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%
TWM ProShares UltraShort Russell2000	6.67%	5.36%	6.21%	4.72%	0.17%	0.00%	0.41%	1.49%	0.73%	0.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWM and TWM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 1.00, RWM and TWM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, RWM or TWM?

TWM has higher volatility (13.21%) compared to RWM (6.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.58% vs TWM's -99.94%.

Which ETF is better, RWM or TWM?

On 10-year performance, RWM leads with -12.35% vs -28.49% for TWM. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, RWM has been the lower-risk option at 6.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWM or TWM?

Over the 10-year period, RWM has performed better with a -12.35% return vs -28.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWM or TWM?

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

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

TWM has the higher dividend yield at 6.67%, compared with 4.24% for RWM.

What is the main difference between RWM and TWM?

RWM is categorized as Inverse Equities, while TWM is Leveraged Equities. RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%), while TWM tracks Russell 2000 (-200%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.28 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.