Data as of .
ITWO vs RYLD: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year RYLD paid 12.3% of its price in cash against ITWO’s 8.4%, though ITWO returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: ITWO scores higher
Was the payout funded by returns, or by your own capital?
A percentile among the 173 income ETFs writing on an index or proxy. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All income ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, ITWO and RYLD hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | ITWO | RYLD |
|---|---|---|
| Cartesian Therapeutics, Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Only in ITWO | Only in RYLD |
|---|---|
| Bloom Energy Corp. 1.83% | GLOBAL X RUSSELL 2000 ETF 102.02% |
| Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd. 1.12% | CASH 1.02% |
| Sterling Infrastructure, Inc. 0.75% | CANADIAN DOLLAR 0.00% |
| IonQ, Inc. 0.73% | INHIBRX INC 0.00% |
| Fabrinet 0.69% | NOVARTIS AG - CVR 0.00% |
| Nextpower, Inc. 0.67% | OMNIAB INC - 12.5 EARNOUT 0.00% |
| Coeur Mining, Inc. 0.58% | OMNIAB INC - 15.00 EARNOUT 0.00% |
| TTM Technologies, Inc. 0.52% | OTHER PAYABLE & RECEIVABLES -0.97% |
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 May 31, 2026 and Sep 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITWO | RYLD | ITWO | RYLD | ITWO | RYLD | |
| 3 months | −3.2% | +1.3% | 1.5% | 3.0% | +0.5 pts | +5.0 pts |
| 6 months | +18.3% | +12.9% | 5.0% | 6.4% | +0.4 pts | −5.0 pts |
| 1 year | +19.6% | +16.1% | 8.4% | 12.3% | +2.4 pts | −1.1 pts |
| 3 years | not published | +29.5% | not published | 32.2% | not published | −33.0 pts |
| Since launch | +39.2% | +49.8% | 22.5% | 67.2% | +1.8 pts | −51.2 pts |
| ITWO ProShares Russell 2000 High Income ETF Option income on IWM, paying monthly | RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF Covered call on IWM, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | ProShares | Global X |
| Strategy | option income | covered call |
| Benchmark | Russell 2000 (IWM) | Russell 2000 (IWM) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 5.9% | 12.6% |
| Expense ratio | 0.55% | 0.60% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 8.4% | 12.3% |
| Price change, 1 year | +10.5% | +2.9% |
| Total return, 1 year | +19.6% | +16.1% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +17.2% | +17.2% |
| Ahead or behind | +2.4 pts | −1.1 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | 100% |
| Age | 743 days | 2706 days |
| Net assets | $189m | $1.4bn |
ITWO in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, ITWO paid 8.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 10.5%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +19.6%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +17.2% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 2.4 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 5.9%, paid monthly.
RYLD in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, RYLD paid 12.3% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 2.9%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +16.1%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +17.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 1.1 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 12.6%, paid monthly. Global X estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Aug 27, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, ITWO or RYLD?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, ITWO paid 8.4% of its starting price in cash and RYLD paid 12.3%, so RYLD paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, ITWO or RYLD?
- With every distribution reinvested, ITWO returned +19.6% and RYLD returned +16.1% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so ITWO returned more.
- Which is cheaper, ITWO or RYLD?
- ITWO charges 0.55% a year and RYLD charges 0.60%, so ITWO 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, ITWO against RYLD, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/itwo-vs-ryld Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.