RYLG vs. IWM
Compare and contrast key facts about Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM).
RYLG and IWM are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. RYLG is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the Cboe Russell 2000 Half BuyWrite Index. It was launched on Oct 4, 2022. IWM is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Russell 2000 Index. It was launched on May 22, 2000. Both RYLG and IWM are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: RYLG or IWM.
Correlation
The correlation between RYLG and IWM is 0.97, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
RYLG vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
RYLG:
0.73
IWM:
0.55
RYLG:
1.08
IWM:
0.91
RYLG:
1.14
IWM:
1.11
RYLG:
1.36
IWM:
0.61
RYLG:
3.88
IWM:
2.37
RYLG:
2.87%
IWM:
4.55%
RYLG:
15.35%
IWM:
19.84%
RYLG:
-14.27%
IWM:
-59.05%
RYLG:
-6.06%
IWM:
-9.88%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RYLG achieves a -0.92% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's -1.43% return.
RYLG
-0.92%
-4.01%
2.11%
10.53%
N/A
N/A
IWM
-1.43%
-4.60%
-0.54%
10.49%
6.83%
7.34%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
RYLG vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
RYLG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
RYLG vs. IWM — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
RYLG
IWM
RYLG vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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.
Dividends
RYLG vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
RYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 23.32%, more than IWM's 1.16% yield.
| TTM | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RYLG Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF | 23.32% | 23.73% | 5.78% | 4.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 1.16% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% | 1.26% |
Drawdowns
RYLG vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RYLG drawdown since its inception was -14.27%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RYLG and IWM. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
RYLG vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) have volatilities of 4.79% and 4.64%, 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.