Skip to content
Beacon
Screener

IWL vs RYLD

iShares Russell Top 200 ETF vs Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF

IWL

iShares Russell Top 200 ETF

iShares

Annual cost

0.15%

Fund size

$2.1B

RYLD

Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF

Global X Funds

Annual cost

0.60%

Fund size

$1.3B

Key differences

  • IWL costs 0.45% less per year.
  • IWL is classified as equity, while RYLD is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
  • IWL follows a index tracking strategy; RYLD uses option income.
  • Over the last 3 years, IWL has delivered higher annualized returns.
  • IWL has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.

Side-by-side comparison

IWLRYLD
Annual cost (TER)0.15%0.60%
Fund size (AUM)$2.1B$1.3B
Since20092019
Dividend yield0.86%11.85%
Asset classequityalternative
Regionnorth americanorth america
Strategyindex trackingoption income
CAGR 1Y+30.1%+23.1%
CAGR 3Y+24.4%+7.4%
CAGR 5Y+14.7%+2.8%
Sharpe 3Y1.280.35
Volatility 1Y12.34%10.82%
Max drawdown-32.71%-41.52%

Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.

Similar to IWL and RYLD