RWM vs. ZIVB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) and ZIVB (-1x Short VIX Mid-Term Futures Strategy ETF) are both Inverse Equities funds. RWM is passively managed, while ZIVB is actively managed. RWM charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.35%/yr for ZIVB.

Performance

RWM vs. ZIVB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and -1x Short VIX Mid-Term Futures Strategy ETF (ZIVB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

RWM

• 1D: 1.37%
• 1M: -3.30%
• YTD: -13.83%
• 6M: -12.66%
• 1Y: -25.94%
• 3Y*: -12.10%
• 5Y*: -5.21%
• 10Y*: -11.85%

ZIVB

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RWM vs. ZIVB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	1.52%
ZIVB -1x Short VIX Mid-Term Futures Strategy ETF	0.00%

Return for Risk

RWM vs. ZIVB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

RWM

RWM Risk / Return Rank: 1
RWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
RWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
RWM Omega Ratio Rank: 1
RWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
RWM 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. ZIVB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) and -1x Short VIX Mid-Term Futures Strategy ETF (ZIVB). 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.

	RWM	ZIVB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-1.37	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-1.95	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.79	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.95	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.65	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RWM	ZIVB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.23	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.51	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.49	—	—

Drawdowns

RWM vs. ZIVB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWM drawdown since its inception was -95.47%, which is greater than ZIVB's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWM and ZIVB.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWM	ZIVB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-95.47%	0.00%	-95.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.26%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-41.38%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.38%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-73.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.41%	0.00%	-95.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.04%	0.00%	-74.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.73%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RWM	ZIVB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.84%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.52%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.07%	0.00%	+19.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.56%	0.00%	+22.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.11%	0.00%	+23.11%

RWM vs. ZIVB - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than ZIVB's 1.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWM vs. ZIVB - Dividend Comparison

RWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, while ZIVB has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	4.12%	3.97%	6.03%	4.78%	0.39%	0.00%	0.20%	1.55%	0.87%	0.07%
ZIVB -1x Short VIX Mid-Term Futures Strategy ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Which ETF is better, RWM or ZIVB?

On fees, RWM is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWM or ZIVB?

RWM is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for ZIVB.

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

RWM has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 0.00% for ZIVB.

What is the main difference between RWM and ZIVB?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Volatility Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RWM and 1.35% for ZIVB.