RWM vs. VTI
RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and VTI (Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWM is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 (-100%), while VTI is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Total Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RWM returned -11.66%/yr vs 14.71%/yr for VTI. At a correlation of -0.89, they often move in opposite directions. RWM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VTI.
Performance
RWM vs. VTI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RWM achieves a -15.79% return, which is significantly lower than VTI's 11.37% return. Over the past 10 years, RWM has underperformed VTI with an annualized return of -11.66%, while VTI has yielded a comparatively higher 14.71% 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%
VTI
- 1D
- 0.37%
- 1M
- 1.60%
- 6M
- 9.07%
- YTD
- 11.37%
- 1Y
- 22.02%
- 3Y*
- 19.91%
- 5Y*
- 12.17%
- 10Y*
- 14.71%
RWM vs. VTI - 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% |
VTI Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF | 11.37% | 17.10% | 23.81% | 26.05% | -19.52% | 25.68% | 21.08% | 30.67% | -5.23% | 21.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between RWM and VTI is -0.84, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.83 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.87 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.86 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2007 | -0.89 |
The correlation between RWM and VTI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.89 to -0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.
RWM vs. VTI - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RWM
VTI
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
RWM
VTI
Basic Materials
RWM
-
VTI
Communication Services
RWM
-
VTI
Consumer Cyclical
RWM
-
VTI
Consumer Defensive
RWM
-
VTI
Energy
RWM
-
VTI
Healthcare
RWM
-
VTI
Industrials
RWM
-
VTI
Real Estate
RWM
-
VTI
Technology
RWM
-
VTI
Utilities
RWM
-
VTI
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. VTI — Risk / Return Rank
RWM
VTI
RWM vs. VTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI). 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 | VTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.82 | 1.31 | -0.49 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.83 | 2.48 | -3.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.42 | 10.86 | -12.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RWM vs. VTI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.61%, which is greater than VTI's maximum drawdown of -55.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and VTI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RWM | VTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -95.61% | -55.45% | -40.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.57% | -8.92% | -18.65% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -43.12% | -19.30% | -23.82% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -43.12% | -25.36% | -17.76% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -72.51% | -35.00% | -37.51% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -95.51% | -0.57% | -94.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -74.14% | -8.00% | -66.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.16% | 2.03% | +14.13% |
Volatility
RWM vs. VTI - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) have volatilities of 3.80% and 3.75%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RWM | VTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.80% | 3.75% | +0.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.15% | 10.12% | +4.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.39% | 12.82% | +6.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.58% | 17.51% | +5.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.08% | 18.29% | +4.79% |
RWM vs. VTI - Expense Ratio Comparison
RWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than VTI's 0.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
RWM vs. VTI - Dividend Comparison
RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.79%, more than VTI's 1.05% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
VTI Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF | 1.05% | 1.12% | 1.27% | 1.44% | 1.66% | 1.21% | 1.42% | 1.78% | 2.04% | 1.71% | 1.92% | 1.98% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RWM and VTI have a correlation of -0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RWM has higher volatility (3.80%) compared to VTI (3.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWM dropped -95.61% vs VTI's -55.45%.
On 10-year performance, VTI leads with 14.71% vs -11.66% for RWM. On fees, VTI is cheaper at 0.03% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, VTI has performed better with a 14.71% return vs -11.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VTI is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RWM.
RWM has the higher dividend yield at 3.79%, compared with 1.05% for VTI.
RWM is categorized as Inverse Equities, while VTI is Large Cap Blend Equities. RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%), while VTI tracks CRSP US Total Market Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RWM and 0.03% for VTI.
VTI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 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.
Find the right allocation for RWM and VTI
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