Skip to content
Beacon
Screener

SBB vs RWM

ProShares Short SmallCap600 vs ProShares Short Russell2000

SBB

ProShares Short SmallCap600

ProShares

Annual cost

0.95%

Fund size

$4M

RWM

ProShares Short Russell2000

ProShares

Annual cost

0.95%

Fund size

$143M

Key differences

  • RWM is significantly larger than SBB — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
  • Over the last 3 years, SBB has delivered higher annualized returns.

Side-by-side comparison

SBBRWM
Annual cost (TER)0.95%0.95%
Fund size (AUM)$4M$143M
Since20072007
Dividend yield3.56%3.99%
Asset classequityequity
Regionnorth americanorth america
Strategyinverseinverse
CAGR 1Y-22.1%-27.3%
CAGR 3Y-10.4%-12.8%
CAGR 5Y-4.9%-5.6%
Sharpe 3Y-0.59-0.70
Volatility 1Y18.01%19.10%
Max drawdown-72.70%-73.30%

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

Similar to SBB and RWM