Data as of .
ACRT vs IWMW: which paid, and which earned it?
ACRT and IWMW both write options for income.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, ACRT and IWMW hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in ACRT | Only in IWMW |
|---|---|
| RU2K LADDERED AUTOCALL SWAP BANK OF AMERICA NA 100.00% | ISHARES RUSSELL 2000 ETF 100.60% |
| USD CASH 0.38% | |
| ETD LO USD BALANCE WITH R93535 0.00% | |
| ETD USD BALANCE WITH R93535 0.00% | |
| OCT26 RUT C @ 2915.000000 -0.98% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Sep 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACRT | IWMW | ACRT | IWMW | ACRT | IWMW | |
| 3 months | not published | +0.5% | not published | 3.6% | not published | +4.2 pts |
| 6 months | not published | +14.7% | not published | 9.7% | not published | −3.2 pts |
| 1 year | not published | +14.2% | not published | 19.0% | not published | −3.0 pts |
| Since launch | −6.7% | +28.4% | 0.0% | 42.5% | −0.1 pts | −16.2 pts |
| ACRT ProShares Russell 2000 Autocallable Income ETF Option income on IWM | IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF Covered call on IWM, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | ProShares | iShares |
| Strategy | option income | covered call |
| Benchmark | Russell 2000 (IWM) | Russell 2000 (IWM) |
| Pays | not established | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | not published | 7.4% |
| Expense ratio | 0.72% | 0.39% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 0.0% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026) | 19.0% |
| Price change, 1 year | −6.7% | −6.2% |
| Total return, 1 year | −6.7% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026) | +14.2% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | −6.6% | +17.2% |
| Ahead or behind | −0.1 pts | −3.0 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 35 days | 917 days |
| Net assets | $2m | $58m |
ACRT in plain words
Over the period since launch on Aug 14, 2026 to Sep 18, 2026, ACRT paid 0.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 6.7%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −6.7%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned −6.6% over the same days, so a holder was about even.
IWMW in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, IWMW paid 19.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 6.2%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +14.2%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +17.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 3.0 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 7.4%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which is cheaper, ACRT or IWMW?
- ACRT charges 0.72% a year and IWMW charges 0.39%, so IWMW is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, ACRT against IWMW, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/acrt-vs-iwmw Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.