RYLG vs. CWII
RYLG (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF) and CWII (REX CRWV Growth & Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. RYLG is passively managed, while CWII is actively managed. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RYLG charges 0.35%/yr vs 1.03%/yr for CWII.
Performance
RYLG vs. CWII - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RYLG achieves a 14.56% return, which is significantly lower than CWII's 13,199.78% return.
RYLG
- 1D
- -0.71%
- 1M
- 2.84%
- YTD
- 14.56%
- 6M
- 12.57%
- 1Y
- 30.21%
- 3Y*
- 13.83%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CWII
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 10,273.16%
- YTD
- 13,199.78%
- 6M
- 11,946.90%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RYLG vs. CWII - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RYLG Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF | 14.56% | 0.91% |
CWII REX CRWV Growth & Income ETF | 13,199.78% | -45.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between RYLG and CWII is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2025 | 0.45 |
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
RYLG vs. CWII — Risk / Return Rank
RYLG
CWII
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
RYLG vs. CWII - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) and REX CRWV Growth & Income ETF (CWII). 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.
| RYLG | CWII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.71 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.23 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RYLG vs. CWII - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RYLG drawdown since its inception was -22.37%, smaller than the maximum CWII drawdown of -51.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RYLG and CWII.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RYLG | CWII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.37% | -51.04% | +28.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.18% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.37% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.71% | 0.00% | -0.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.09% | -33.26% | +29.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.13% | — | — |
Volatility
RYLG vs. CWII - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RYLG | CWII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.16% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.10% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.05% | 13,701.30% | -13,686.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.15% | 13,701.30% | -13,684.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.15% | 13,701.30% | -13,684.15% |
RYLG vs. CWII - Expense Ratio Comparison
RYLG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CWII's 1.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
RYLG vs. CWII - Dividend Comparison
RYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.29%, less than CWII's 123.26% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWII REX CRWV Growth & Income ETF | 123.26% | 6.09% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RYLG Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF | 10.29% | 10.82% | 23.73% | 5.78% | 4.36% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RYLG and CWII have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RYLG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RYLG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.03% for CWII.
CWII has the higher dividend yield at 123.26%, compared with 10.29% for RYLG.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and REX Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RYLG and 1.03% for CWII.
Find the right allocation for RYLG and CWII
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