Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
IWM vs IWMI: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, IWM returned +14.1% to IWMI's +15.1%, and IWM charges 0.19% to IWMI's 0.68%.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about IWM and IWMI
Net assets on Oct 27, 2026: $75.5bn for iShares Russell 2000 ETF and $1.3bn for NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF.
Pair scorecard
IWM costs 0.49 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 1.0 point; IWM is far larger, $75.5bn against $1.3bn.
| Measure | IWM | IWMI |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +14.1% | +15.1% |
| Price change, 1 year | rose 13.0% | fell 0.2% |
| Latest payout, annualized | 14.0% | |
| Return of capital, issuer estimate | 76% of the Oct 23, 2026 payment | |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 7.6%, high on Aug 14, 2026 | |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | Russell 2000 Index | Benchmark: Russell 2000, measured through IWM |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.19% | 0.68% |
| Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026 | $75.5bn | $1.3bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 0% | |
| In the S&P 500, by weight | 0% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 3.3% | |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Oct 27, 2026 and Oct 28, 2026. Method
Risk and return
Jul 5, 2024 to Oct 23, 2026 · 120 weekly returnsEach against its own benchmark: IWM against VTWO, Oct 1, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026; IWMI against IWM, Jul 5, 2024 to Oct 23, 2026.
IWM returned more: +40.7% to +36.4%. IWMI swung less: 15.7% to 20.0%. IWMI fell less at its worst: −21.4% to −24.7%.
Full scorecard
19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓
| Measure | IWM | IWMI | Edge | How it is measured |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return | ||||
| Total return | +40.7% | +36.4% | IWM | Price change plus distributions, reinvested. |
| Annualized | +15.9% | +14.4% | IWM (slight) | Total return as a yearly rate. |
| Price return | +37.3% | −2.8% | IWM | Price change alone, distributions left out. |
| Risk | ||||
| Volatility | 20.0% | 15.7% | IWMI | Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier. |
| Downside deviation | 13.4% | 11.1% | IWMI | Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate. |
| Max drawdown | −24.7% | −21.4% | IWMI | Deepest fall from a high to the low after it. |
| Upside capture | 101.0% | 68.2% | Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose. | |
| Downside capture | 100.5% | 83.9% | Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better. | |
| Beta | 1.01 | 0.77 | Not an edge | How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves. |
| R squared | 1.00 | 0.96 | Not an edge | Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains. |
| Risk-adjusted | ||||
| Sharpe | 0.63 | 0.67 | IWMI (slight) | Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility. |
| Sortino | 0.94 | 0.95 | Tie | Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation. |
| Treynor | 0.106 | 0.137 | Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta. | |
| Calmar | 0.65 | 0.67 | IWMI (slight) | Annualized return divided by the max drawdown. |
| Against the benchmark | ||||
| Benchmark | VTWO | IWM | The ETF each fund is measured against. | |
| Alpha | −0.1% a year | +0.8% a year | Not significant | Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts. |
| Alpha t-stat | −0.36 | 0.38 | Not an edge | How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance. |
| Alpha range | −0.6% to +0.4% | −3.4% to +5.1% | Includes zero | The 95% range for the yearly alpha. |
| Information ratio | −0.02 | −0.37 | Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error. | |
| Tracking error | 1.0% | 5.6% | Not an edge | How far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized. |
Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 120 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, IWM and IWMI hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Oct 27, 2026 and Oct 28, 2026.
half
0% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
IWM and IWMI on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ. Cash paid: distributions over the window, as a share of the starting price.
IWM and IWMI do different jobs. What does each one do in a portfolio?
- What each follows. IWM follows Russell 2000 Index and IWMI is measured against Russell 2000 through IWM.
- Holdings in common. 0% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Oct 27, 2026 and Oct 28, 2026).
- Cost. IWM charges 0.19% of assets a year and IWMI 0.68%, a gap of 0.49 points.
Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
IWM
IWM tracks the Russell 2000. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +14.1% with distributions reinvested, against +14.3% for its benchmark, the Russell 2000 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.19% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1,977 positions, with the top ten at 3.3%. It sat 7.6% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
IWMI
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, IWMI paid 14.7% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 0.2%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +15.1%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +14.1% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 1.0 pts. At its price on Oct 28, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 14.0%, paid monthly. NEOS estimates that 76% of the distribution paid Oct 23, 2026 was a return of capital (its 19a-1 notice). That is a tax label, not a measure of erosion.
Questions people ask
- Are IWM and IWMI in the same category?
- IWM is a stock ETF and IWMI is an option-income ETF, so they do different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and holdings.
- Which returned more over the last year, IWM or IWMI?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWM returned +14.1% and IWMI +15.1%.
- Which is cheaper, IWM or IWMI?
- IWM is cheaper, by 0.49 percentage points a year. That is about $49 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, IWM against IWMI, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwm-vs-iwmi
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). IWM against IWMI. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwm-vs-iwmi
[IWM against IWMI (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwm-vs-iwmi)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.