Data as of .
IWMY vs RYLD: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year IWMY paid 29.9% of its price in cash against RYLD’s 12.3%, though RYLD returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: RYLD 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, IWMY and RYLD hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in IWMY | Only in RYLD |
|---|---|
| Rut 12/18/2026 200.34 C 92.47% | GLOBAL X RUSSELL 2000 ETF 102.02% |
| Cash & Other 4.95% | CASH 1.02% |
| First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/2031 2.71% | CANADIAN DOLLAR 0.00% |
| Rut 09/21/2026 2868.98 C 0.22% | CARTESIAN THERAPEUTICS INC 0.00% |
| Rut 09/21/2026 2860.4 C -0.35% | INHIBRX INC 0.00% |
| NOVARTIS AG - CVR 0.00% | |
| OMNIAB INC - 12.5 EARNOUT 0.00% | |
| OMNIAB INC - 15.00 EARNOUT 0.00% |
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 and Sep 21, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IWMY | RYLD | IWMY | RYLD | IWMY | RYLD | |
| 3 months | −3.9% | +1.3% | 7.2% | 3.0% | −0.3 pts | +5.0 pts |
| 6 months | +14.5% | +12.9% | 16.1% | 6.4% | −3.4 pts | −5.0 pts |
| 1 year | +6.3% | +16.1% | 29.9% | 12.3% | −10.9 pts | −1.1 pts |
| 3 years | not published | +29.5% | not published | 32.2% | not published | −33.0 pts |
| Since launch | +41.5% | +49.8% | 91.8% | 67.2% | −37.1 pts | −51.2 pts |
| IWMY Defiance R2000 Weekly Distribution ETF Option income on IWM, paying weekly | RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF Covered call on IWM, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Defiance | Global X |
| Strategy | option income | covered call |
| Benchmark | Russell 2000 (IWM) | Russell 2000 (IWM) |
| Pays | weekly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 30.2% | 12.6% |
| Expense ratio | 1.05% | 0.60% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 29.9% | 12.3% |
| Price change, 1 year | −24.9% | +2.9% |
| Total return, 1 year | +6.3% | +16.1% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +17.2% | +17.2% |
| Ahead or behind | −10.9 pts | −1.1 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | 0% | 100% |
| Age | 1053 days | 2706 days |
| Net assets | $90m | $1.4bn |
IWMY in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, IWMY paid 29.9% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 24.9%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +6.3%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +17.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 10.9 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 30.2%, paid weekly. Defiance estimates that 0% of the distribution paid Sep 18, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).
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, IWMY or RYLD?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, IWMY paid 29.9% of its starting price in cash and RYLD paid 12.3%, so IWMY paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, IWMY or RYLD?
- With every distribution reinvested, IWMY returned +6.3% and RYLD returned +16.1% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so RYLD returned more.
- Which is cheaper, IWMY or RYLD?
- IWMY charges 1.05% a year and RYLD charges 0.60%, so RYLD 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, IWMY against RYLD, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/iwmy-vs-ryld Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.