Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

IWMI vs RDTY: which paid, and which earned it?

Over the year RDTY paid 34.2% of its price in cash against IWMI’s 15.9%, though IWMI returned more with it reinvested.

NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF and YieldMax(R) R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF.

15.9%IWMI cash paid, 1 year
34.2%RDTY cash paid, 1 year
+18.4%IWMI total return, 1 year
+15.7%RDTY total return, 1 year

ETFIQ Return Stability Score: IWMI scores higher

Was the payout funded by returns, or by your own capital?

IWMI 71.9RDTY 34.63.8, the lowest in this set96.8, the highest

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

IWMI1.1 pts ahead of IWM · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
IWM+17.2%IWMI+18.4%15.9% of it arrived as cash1.1 pts ahead of IWMTotal return, distributions reinvestedIWM+17.2%IWMI+18.4%15.9% as cash1.1 pts ahead of IWM
RDTY1.5 pts behind IWM · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
IWM+17.2%RDTY+15.7%34.2% of it arrived as cash1.5 pts behind IWMTotal return, distributions reinvestedIWM+17.2%RDTY+15.7%34.2% as cash1.5 pts behind IWM

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IWMI and RDTY hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Only in each
Only in IWMIOnly in RDTY
Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF 100.10%TREASURY BILL 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 Apr 30, 2026 and Sep 21, 2026.

Performance, window by window

IWMI and RDTY over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
IWMIRDTYIWMIRDTYIWMIRDTY
3 months−1.7%+0.8%3.5%8.8%+1.9 pts+4.4 pts
6 months+16.0%+19.6%8.0%19.5%−1.9 pts+1.7 pts
1 year+18.4%+15.7%15.9%34.2%+1.1 pts−1.5 pts
Since launch+40.2%+30.1%33.3%49.9%−4.9 pts−10.8 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
IWMI and RDTY on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IWMI
NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF
Option income on IWM, paying monthly
RDTY
YieldMax(R) R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF
0DTE covered call on IWM, paying weekly
IssuerNEOSYieldMax
Strategyoption income0DTE covered call
BenchmarkRussell 2000 (IWM)Russell 2000 (IWM)
Paysmonthlyweekly
Payout rate, annualized14.6%29.1%
Expense ratio0.68%1.73%
Cash paid, 1 year15.9%34.2%
Price change, 1 year+1.3%−21.8%
Total return, 1 year+18.4%+15.7%
Benchmark return, 1 year+17.2%+17.2%
Ahead or behind+1.1 pts−1.5 pts
Return of capital, latest estimate100%70%
Age815 days561 days
Net assets$1.3bn$19m

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).

RDTY in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, RDTY paid 34.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 21.8%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +15.7%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +17.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 1.5 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 29.1%, paid weekly. YieldMax estimates that 70% of the distribution paid Sep 17, 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, IWMI or RDTY?
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, IWMI paid 15.9% of its starting price in cash and RDTY paid 34.2%, so RDTY 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 RDTY?
With every distribution reinvested, IWMI returned +18.4% and RDTY returned +15.7% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so IWMI returned more.
Which is cheaper, IWMI or RDTY?
IWMI charges 0.68% a year and RDTY charges 1.73%, so IWMI 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.

IWMI against RDTY, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 18, 2026. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, IWMI against RDTY, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/iwmi-vs-rdty Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources