Skip to content
Beacon
Screener

RYLD vs IWO

Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF

RYLD

Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF

Global X Funds

Annual cost

0.60%

Fund size

$1.3B

IWO

iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF

iShares

Annual cost

0.24%

Fund size

$13.9B

Key differences

  • IWO costs 0.36% less per year.
  • IWO is significantly larger than RYLD — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
  • RYLD is classified as alternative, while IWO is equity — different risk/return profiles.
  • RYLD follows a option income strategy; IWO uses index tracking.
  • Over the last 3 years, IWO has delivered higher annualized returns.
  • IWO has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.

Side-by-side comparison

RYLDIWO
Annual cost (TER)0.60%0.24%
Fund size (AUM)$1.3B$13.9B
Since20192000
Dividend yield11.85%0.42%
Asset classalternativeequity
Regionnorth americanorth america
Strategyoption incomeindex tracking
CAGR 1Y+24.2%+43.1%
CAGR 3Y+8.0%+19.5%
CAGR 5Y+3.3%+6.5%
Sharpe 3Y0.390.75
Volatility 1Y10.84%21.41%
Max drawdown-41.52%-42.01%

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

Similar to RYLD and IWO