XBCI vs. IWMI

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

XBCI (NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF) and IWMI (NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XBCI is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Neos, while IWMI is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Neos. Both are actively managed. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XBCI charges 0.98%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for IWMI.

Performance

XBCI vs. IWMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF (XBCI) and NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

XBCI

• 1D: -3.45%
• 1M: -4.99%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IWMI

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: 1.00%
• 6M: 11.54%
• YTD: 16.26%
• 1Y: 31.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XBCI vs. IWMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
XBCI NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF	-24.98%
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF	10.79%

Correlation

The correlation between XBCI and IWMI is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2026	0.56

Return for Risk

XBCI vs. IWMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

XBCI

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

IWMI

IWMI Risk / Return Rank: 82
IWMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
IWMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
IWMI Omega Ratio Rank: 76
IWMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
IWMI Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

XBCI vs. IWMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF (XBCI) and NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI). 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.

	XBCI	IWMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.04	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.87	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.35	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.72	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	15.30	—

Drawdowns

XBCI vs. IWMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBCI drawdown since its inception was -37.31%, which is greater than IWMI's maximum drawdown of -23.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBCI and IWMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	XBCI	IWMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.31%	-23.88%	-13.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-8.40%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.79%	-1.59%	-31.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.10%	-3.94%	-10.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.04%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	XBCI	IWMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.03%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.43%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	65.47%	15.38%	+50.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	65.47%	17.79%	+47.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	65.47%	17.79%	+47.68%

XBCI vs. IWMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBCI has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is higher than IWMI's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBCI vs. IWMI - Dividend Comparison

XBCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 26.75%, more than IWMI's 13.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF	13.48%	14.05%	8.78%
XBCI NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF	26.75%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XBCI and IWMI in my portfolio?

XBCI and IWMI have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XBCI or IWMI?

On fees, IWMI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XBCI or IWMI?

IWMI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for XBCI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XBCI or IWMI?

XBCI has the higher dividend yield at 26.75%, compared with 13.48% for IWMI.

What is the main difference between XBCI and IWMI?

XBCI is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while IWMI is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for XBCI and 0.68% for IWMI.