Data as of Nov 4, 2026.

vsOpen in the appCompare their flowsaskIQ about these two fundsAsk the committee about these two funds
Income ETFs

IWMI vs RYLG: Dividend Yield & Total Return

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, IWMI paid 15.0% of its price in cash against RYLG’s 10.7%, and returned more with it reinvested.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about IWMI and RYLG

Net assets: $1.3bn on Oct 28, 2026 for NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF, and $7.7m on Oct 12, 2026 for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF.

At a glance
15.0%
IWMI cash paid, 1 year
10.7%
RYLG cash paid, 1 year
+18.6%
IWMI total return, 1 year
+16.0%
RYLG total return, 1 year
IWMI · 1 year to Nov 4, 2026 About even with IWM
IWMI
+18.6%
IWM
+19.0%

About even with IWM

IWMI over 1 year: paid 15.0%, price +2.8%, total +18.6%, IWM +19.0%, −0.4 pts. Data to Nov 4, 2026.

IWM

+19.0%

IWMI

+18.6%

15.0% of it arrived as cash

about even with IWM

Total return, distributions reinvested

About even with IWM

IWMI over 1 year: paid 15.0%, price +2.8%, total +18.6%, IWM +19.0%, −0.4 pts. Data to Nov 4, 2026.

IWM

+19.0%

IWMI

+18.6%

15.0% as cash

about even with IWM

15.0% of it arrived as cash. Total return, distributions reinvested. IWMI over 1 year: paid 15.0%, price +2.8%, total +18.6%, IWM +19.0%, −0.4 pts. Data to Nov 4, 2026.

Data to Nov 4, 2026.
RYLG · 1 year to Nov 4, 2026 3 pts behind IWM
RYLG
+16.0%
IWM
+19.0%

3 pts behind IWM

RYLG over 1 year: paid 10.7%, price +4.4%, total +16.0%, IWM +19.0%, −3.0 pts. Data to Nov 4, 2026.

IWM

+19.0%

RYLG

+16.0%

10.7% of it arrived as cash

3 pts behind IWM

Total return, distributions reinvested

3 pts behind IWM

RYLG over 1 year: paid 10.7%, price +4.4%, total +16.0%, IWM +19.0%, −3.0 pts. Data to Nov 4, 2026.

IWM

+19.0%

RYLG

+16.0%

10.7% cash

3 pts behind IWM

10.7% of it arrived as cash. Both charts share one scale, 0 to +19.0%. RYLG over 1 year: paid 10.7%, price +4.4%, total +16.0%, IWM +19.0%, −3.0 pts. Data to Nov 4, 2026.

Both charts share one scale, 0 to +19.0%. Data to Nov 4, 2026.

Pair scorecard

RYLG costs 0.33 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 2.6 points; IWMI is far larger, $1.3bn against $7.7m.

Points (pts) are percentage points.

IWMI vs RYLG: Dividend Yield & Total Return
MeasureIWMIRYLG
Paid and earned
Total return, 1 year+18.6%+16.0%
Price change, 1 yearrose 2.8%rose 4.4%
Return of capital, issuer estimate76% of the Oct 23, 2026 payment100% of the Sep 24, 2026 payment
Against its benchmark
BenchmarkRussell 2000, measured through IWMRussell 2000, measured through IWM
Against its benchmark, same daysbehind by 3.0 pts
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.68%0.35%
Net assets, as of Oct 12, 2026$1.3bn$7.7m
Holdings
Holdings in common0%
ETFIQ Distribution Coverage Score · RYLG scores higher How much of what it paid out did its total return cover?
IQ Income Score71IWMI78.7RYLG

How much of its payouts the fund's total return covered, ranked against 167 income ETFs not writing on a single company. 100 is best. How it is computed

0.3, the lowest in this set 99.7, the highest

One year only, and a ratio of two published numbers: it says nothing about where a distribution came from. All income ETFs ranked by it →

Method

Risk and return

Jul 5, 2024 to Oct 30, 2026 · 121 weekly returns · each against IWM
IWMI RYLG
Return
Total return edge IWMI +38.1% +33.9%
Annualized edge IWMI +14.9% +13.4%
Price return edge IWMI −1.6% −5.7%
Risk
Volatility edge RYLG (slight) 15.7% 15.1%
Max drawdown edge RYLG −21.4% −19.1%
Downside capture 83.9% 81.8%
Beta 0.77 0.74
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe edge IWMI (slight) 0.70 0.63
Sortino edge IWMI 0.99 0.89
Treynor 0.142 0.128
Calmar edge Tie 0.70 0.70
Against the benchmark
Alpha +0.9% a year −0.2% a year
Alpha t-stat 0.42 −0.08
Information ratio −0.38 −0.60
Tracking error 5.6% 5.9%
Reading

From Jul 2024 to Oct 2026, IWMI returned more: +38.1% to +33.9%. RYLG swung slightly less: 15.1% to 15.7%. RYLG fell less at its worst: −19.1% to −21.4%.

Full scorecard

19 measures, with how each is measured
Open ↓
Risk and return: IWMI vs RYLG: Dividend Yield & Total Return
MeasureIWMIRYLGIWMEdgeHow it is measured
Return
Total return+38.1%+33.9%IWMIPrice change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized+14.9%+13.4%IWMITotal return as a yearly rate.
Price return−1.6%−5.7%IWMIPrice change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility15.7%15.1%RYLG (slight)Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation11.1%10.7%RYLG (slight)Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown−21.4%−19.1%RYLGDeepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Upside capture68.4%63.1%100.0%IWMI (slight)Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose.
Downside capture83.9%81.8%100.0%RYLG (slight)Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better.
Beta0.770.741.00RYLG lowerHow far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves.
R squared0.960.961.00Not an edgeShare of its weekly moves its benchmark explains.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe0.700.63IWMI (slight)Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino0.990.89IWMIReturn above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Treynor0.1420.1280.130IWMI (slight)Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta.
Calmar0.700.70TieAnnualized return divided by the max drawdown.
Against the benchmark
BenchmarkIWMIWMIWMThe ETF each fund is measured against.
Alpha+0.9% a year−0.2% a year0.0%Not significantYearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts.
Alpha t-stat0.42−0.08Not an edgeHow sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance.
Alpha range−3.3% to +5.1%−3.9% to +3.6%Both include zeroThe 95% range for the yearly alpha.
Information ratio−0.38−0.60IWMIReturn against its benchmark per unit of tracking error.
Tracking error5.6%5.9%0.0%Not an edgeHow far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 121 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

0%

By the books each fund has filed, IWMI and RYLG hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Nov 3, 2026.

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first IWMI RYLG
Only in one fund ↓
Only in IWMI
Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF 99.81%
RUT US 12/18/26 C2910 -0.43%
RUT US 12/18/26 C2860 -0.65%
Only in RYLG
Global X Russell 2000 ETF 100.44%
Check overlap with more funds →

Side by side

IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF · Option income on IWM, paying monthly RYLG Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF · Covered call on IWM, paying monthly
Issuer NEOS Global X
Strategy option income covered call
Benchmark Russell 2000 (IWM) Russell 2000 (IWM)
Pays monthly monthly
Payout rate, annualized 13.9% 5.7%
Expense ratio 0.68% 0.35%
Cash paid, 1 year 15.0% 10.7%
Price change, 1 year +2.8% +4.4%
Total return, 1 year +18.6% +16.0%
Benchmark return, 1 year +19.0% +19.0%
Ahead or behind −0.4 pts −3.0 pts
Return of capital, latest estimate 76% 100%
Age 2.4 years 4.1 years
Net assets, IWMI as of Oct 28, 2026 and RYLG as of Oct 12, 2026 $1.3bn $7.7m

As of Nov 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ. Cash paid: distributions over the window, as a share of the starting price. Payout rate: the latest payment, annualized, over today’s price.

Window by window

Window by window: IWMI vs RYLG: Dividend Yield & Total Return
Total returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
WindowIWMIRYLGIWMIRYLGIWMIRYLG
3 months−3.0%−3.8%3.4%1.4%+2.0 pts+1.2 pts
6 months+1.9%+2.0%7.0%3.4%+2.3 pts+2.5 pts
1 year+18.6%+16.0%15.0%10.7%−0.3 pts−3.0 pts
3 years–+50.0%–40.2%–−18.3 pts
Since launchNot the same days: IWMI Jun 2024 · RYLG Oct 2022+40.5%+46.2%34.4%44.5%−4.6 pts−24.6 pts

– means no data for this window. Open this comparison in the app →

Client brief:

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Your saved page · Privacy.

Alert

The week's ETF fund flows, by email on Sundays.

One-click unsubscribe. See Privacy.

About each fund
IWMI

Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, IWMI paid 15.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 2.8%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +18.6%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +19.0% over the same days, so a holder was about even. At its price on Nov 4, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 13.9%, 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.

RYLG

Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, RYLG paid 10.7% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 4.4%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +16.0%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +19.0% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 3.0 pts. At its price on Nov 4, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 5.7%, paid monthly. Global X estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Sep 24, 2026 was a return of capital (its 19a-1 notice).

Questions people ask

Which paid more, IWMI or RYLG?
Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, IWMI paid 15.0% of its starting price in cash and RYLG paid 10.7%, 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 RYLG?
With every distribution reinvested, IWMI returned +18.6% and RYLG +16.0% over the year to Nov 4, 2026.
Which is cheaper, IWMI or RYLG?
IWMI charges 0.68% a year and RYLG charges 0.35%, so RYLG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Sources and dates

Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.

How this is computed

It is a place in a set, not a rating or a recommendation.

Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.

Every number is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.

Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, IWMI against RYLG, data as of Nov 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/iwmi-vs-rylg

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.