TWM vs. RWM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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

Performance

TWM vs. RWM - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

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

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%

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%

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

TWM vs. RWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
TWM ProShares UltraShort Russell2000	-32.09%	-24.71%	-19.35%	-26.84%	28.43%	-35.43%	-60.01%	-38.40%	19.15%	-26.36%
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000	-16.29%	-9.40%	-5.91%	-10.43%	18.34%	-17.90%	-31.04%	-19.83%	11.57%	-13.61%

Correlation

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

TWM vs. RWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

TWM vs. RWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

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

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.

TWM vs. RWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM) and ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM). 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.

	TWM	RWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.28	-1.39	+0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.08	-2.01	-0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	0.78	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.99	-0.98	0.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.64	-1.74	+0.10

TWM vs. RWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

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

TWM vs. RWM - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

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

Volatility

TWM vs. RWM - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM) has a higher volatility of 13.21% compared to ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) at 6.51%. This indicates that TWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

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

TWM vs. RWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

TWM vs. RWM - Dividend Comparison

TWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.67%, more than RWM's 4.24% 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 TWM and RWM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 1.00, TWM and RWM 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, TWM or RWM?

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

Which ETF is better, TWM or RWM?

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, TWM or RWM?

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, TWM or RWM?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between TWM and RWM?

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

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.