Screener
RYLD vs IWM
Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 ETF
Key differences
- IWM costs 0.41% less per year.
- IWM is significantly larger than RYLD — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- RYLD is classified as alternative, while IWM is equity — different risk/return profiles.
- RYLD follows a option income strategy; IWM uses index tracking.
- Over the last 3 years, IWM has delivered higher annualized returns.
- IWM has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| RYLD | IWM | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.60% | 0.19% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $1.3B | $76.9B |
| Since | 2019 | 2000 |
| Dividend yield | 11.85% | 0.91% |
| Asset class | alternative | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | option income | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +23.1% | +41.8% |
| CAGR 3Y | +7.4% | +18.8% |
| CAGR 5Y | +2.8% | +6.5% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.35 | 0.75 |
| Volatility 1Y | 10.82% | 19.22% |
| Max drawdown | -41.52% | -41.13% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to RYLD and IWM
Explore further