Which came closer to its stated multiple, RWM or URTY?

Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, RWM finished 1.7 points from what its multiple implies and URTY finished 1.6 points from its own, so URTY came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.

Are RWM and URTY levered on the same thing?

Yes. Both are levered on the Russell 2000, RWM at -1 times and URTY at +3 times the daily move.

Which one decays faster, RWM or URTY?

Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window RWM’s moved at 13% annualized and URTY’s at 13%, so RWM has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.

Can I hold RWM or URTY for a year?

Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.

Which is cheaper, RWM or URTY?

RWM charges 0.95% a year and URTY charges 0.95%, so RWM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Share on X Download as PDF Open live

RWM vs URTY: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, RWM finished 1.6 points over and URTY 1.9 points short. ProShares Short Russell2000 and ProShares UltraPro Russell2000.

+8.6%

RWM returned, 3 months

−22.3%

URTY returned, 3 months

+1.7 pts

RWM from its stated multiple

−1.6 pts

URTY from its stated multiple

RWM · 3 months to Sep 30, 20261.7 pts ahead of its stated multiple

RWM returned +8.6% while −1 times IWM's move would have been +6.9%

URTY · 3 months to Sep 30, 20261.6 pts short of its stated multiple

URTY returned −22.3% while 3 times IWM's move would have been −20.8%

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score · URTY scores higherDid it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?

RWM among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months

RWM 54

0.4, the lowest in this set99.6, the highest

URTY among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months

URTY 70.5

0.1, the lowest in this set99.9, the highest

A percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months. URTY is a percentile among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months, a different set, so the two marks are not on one scale. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All leveraged ETFs ranked by it → How it is computed →

Performance, window by window

	Total return		Multiple would give		Difference
Window	RWM	URTY	RWM	URTY	RWM	URTY
1 month	+5.9%	−15.8%	+5.2%	−15.6%	+0.7 pts	−0.1 pts
3 months	+8.6%	−22.3%	+6.9%	−20.8%	+1.7 pts	−1.6 pts
6 months	−9.3%	+28.2%	−11.9%	+35.7%	+2.6 pts	−7.5 pts
1 year	−11.5%	+27.7%	−16.0%	+48.1%	+4.5 pts	−20.4 pts
3 years	−32.3%	+104.5%	−62.6%	+187.7%	+30.3 pts	−83.3 pts
Since launch RWM Jan 2010 · URTY Feb 2010	−89.9%	+572.8%	not meaningful	not meaningful	not meaningful	not meaningful

RWM and URTY over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →

On the same fields

RWM

ProShares Short Russell2000 · Aims to return 1 times the opposite of the daily move of the Russell 2000

URTY

ProShares UltraPro Russell2000 · Aims to return three times the daily move of the Russell 2000

Issuer ProShares ProShares

Sets out to return -1x +3x

Underlying asset IWM IWM

Segment us small cap us small cap

Fund returned, 3 months or since launch +8.6% −22.3%

Underlying returned, over that window −6.9% −6.9%

What the stated multiple implies, over that window +6.9% −20.8%

Difference from stated, over that window +1.7 pts −1.6 pts

Fund returned, 1 year or since launch −11.5% +27.7%

Difference from stated, over that window +4.5 pts −20.4 pts

Underlying volatility 13% 13%

Difference over the days both have traded no shared window −1.6 pts

Expense ratio 0.95% 0.95%

Launched Jan 4, 2010 Feb 11, 2010

Net assets $170m $271m

RWM and URTY on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

RWM in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: RWM returned +8.6% where its own daily promise gave +7.0%, 1.6 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −1 times IWM's −6.9% implies +6.9%, which makes RWM look 1.7 points over. 0.0 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −1 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. RWM aims to return -1 times IWM's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not -1 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more. IWM moved at 13% annualized over that window. That is what decides how far the two figures separate: the same fund on a calm underlying and a violent one is a different product.

URTY in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: URTY returned −22.3% where its own daily promise gave −20.4%, 1.9 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 3 times IWM's −6.9% implies −20.8%, which makes URTY look 1.6 points short. 0.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. URTY aims to return +3 times IWM's move each day, then resets. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +3 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, RWM or URTY?: Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, RWM finished 1.7 points from what its multiple implies and URTY finished 1.6 points from its own, so URTY came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are RWM and URTY levered on the same thing?: Yes. Both are levered on the Russell 2000, RWM at -1 times and URTY at +3 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, RWM or URTY?: Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window RWM’s moved at 13% annualized and URTY’s at 13%, so RWM has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold RWM or URTY for a year?: Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.
Which is cheaper, RWM or URTY?: RWM charges 0.95% a year and URTY charges 0.95%, so RWM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

RWM vs TWM RWM vs TZA RWM vs UWM RWM vs SRTY URTY vs UWM URTY vs SRTY URTY vs TNA URTY vs TWM

IWM →RWM on its own →URTY on its own →How every figure is computed →Standards and sources →

Where these figures came from

RWM and URTY filings on SEC EDGAR ↗RWM and URTY prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗ProShares page for RWM ↗ProShares page for URTY ↗

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page

ETFIQ, RWM against URTY, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/rwm-vs-urty

Open data

Free to use with attribution. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology.