Data as of .
IWMI vs OVS: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year IWMI paid 15.9% of its price in cash against OVS’s 9.8% and the two finished level on total return.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: OVS 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, IWMI and OVS hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in IWMI | Only in OVS |
|---|---|
| Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF 100.10% | iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF 100.00% |
| RUT US 10/16/26 C3050 -0.03% | |
| RUT US 10/16/26 C3005 -0.07% |
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 21, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IWMI | OVS | IWMI | OVS | IWMI | OVS | |
| 3 months | −1.7% | −2.7% | 3.5% | 2.6% | +1.9 pts | +0.9 pts |
| 6 months | +16.0% | +16.8% | 8.0% | 5.9% | −1.9 pts | −1.1 pts |
| 1 year | +18.4% | +18.9% | 15.9% | 9.8% | +1.1 pts | +1.7 pts |
| 3 years | not published | +57.0% | not published | 20.3% | not published | −5.5 pts |
| Since launch | +40.2% | +113.2% | 33.3% | 39.6% | −4.9 pts | +4.5 pts |
| IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF Option income on IWM, paying monthly | OVS Overlay Shares Small Cap Equity ETF Put-selling overlay on IWM, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | NEOS | Overlay Shares |
| Strategy | option income | put-selling overlay |
| Benchmark | Russell 2000 (IWM) | Russell 2000 (IWM) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 14.6% | 11.0% |
| Expense ratio | 0.68% | not published |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 15.9% | 9.8% |
| Price change, 1 year | +1.3% | +8.5% |
| Total return, 1 year | +18.4% | +18.9% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +17.2% | +17.2% |
| Ahead or behind | +1.1 pts | +1.7 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | 100% | not published |
| Age | 815 days | 2544 days |
| Net assets | $1.3bn | $28m |
IWMI in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, IWMI paid 15.9% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 1.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +18.4%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +17.2% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 1.1 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 14.6%, paid monthly. NEOS estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Jun 18, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).
OVS in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, OVS paid 9.8% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 8.5%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +18.9%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +17.2% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 1.7 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 11.0%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, IWMI or OVS?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, IWMI paid 15.9% of its starting price in cash and OVS paid 9.8%, so IWMI paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, IWMI or OVS?
- With every distribution reinvested, IWMI returned +18.4% and OVS returned +18.9% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so OVS returned more.
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, IWMI against OVS, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/iwmi-vs-ovs Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.