RWM ranks 4th and SKF 20th of 53 funds in the Leveraged Inverse (2x & Other) Category.
RWM vs SKF
Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
0.95%0.95%
RWM 1210.9×the volume
33.1M27.4K
RWM +15.8pt
−10.9%−26.7%
RWM vs SKF Performance
−14.5%−60.9%
- RWM 0.95%
- SKF 0.95%
- RWM $202M
- SKF $11M
- RWM −13.0%, better
- SKF −17.1%
- RWM 3.36%
- SKF 4.10%, better
- RWM 3
- SKF 2
- RWM 33.1M sh, better
- SKF 27.4K sh
- RWM $14.66
- SKF $22.87
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | RWM | SKF |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | C50 | C50 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | B61Higher | C45 |
| Tradability | A89Higher | B61 |
| Holdings | B56Higher | C44 |
| Durability | A70Higher | C54 |
Rank among Leveraged Inverse (2x & Other) funds
Same Category. RWM and SKF are both graded against the same 53 Leveraged Inverse (2x & Other) funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
RWMB
SKFC
In short
RWM Short small caps at one speed: RWM targets the inverse of the Russell 2000's daily move, with no 2x or 3x multiplier on top. Trading since 2007, at 0.95% net of a waiver through September 30, 2027.
SKF The only -2x bear fund on the financials sector, live since January 2007, just ahead of the sector's defining crash. It aims to deliver twice the inverse of the S&P Financial Select Sector Index's daily move. 0.95% net of a waiver through September 30, 2027.
Stated mandate
RWM The fund seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, that correspond to the inverse of the Russell 2000 Index's daily performance.
SKF The fund seeks daily results, before fees and expenses, equal to -2x the daily performance of the S&P Financial Select Sector Index. It is designed to provide inverse exposure when the financials sector declines.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
RWM vs SKF Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
RWM vs SKF Cost
Same expense ratio
$17,869
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
RWM 0.95%
$17,869
SKF 0.95%
$17,869
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | RWM | SKF |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,678 | $1,678 |
| 20 | $6,322 | $6,322 |
| 30 | $17,869 | $17,869 |
- 0.95%RWM
- 0.95%SKF
- Middle half of Leveraged Inverse (2x & Other) funds
- Median 0.95%
RWM 6th cheapest of 53 funds
SKF 6th cheapest of 53 funds
RWM vs SKF Dividends
- RWM 3.36%
- SKF 4.10%, better
- RWM $0.48
- SKF $0.91
- RWM $0.09
- SKF $0.19
- RWM Sep 23, 2026
- SKF Sep 23, 2026
- RWM Sep 29, 2026
- SKF Sep 29, 2026
- RWM Quarterly
- SKF Quarterly
Distribution history
RWM vs SKF Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- RWM
- SKF
Risk facts
- Volatility
- RWM 18.4%, betterSKF 28.5%
- Return per unit of risk
- RWM −0.99, betterSKF −1.26
- Worst fall
- RWM −43.7%, betterSKF −74.8%
- Market sensitivity
- RWM −1.11SKF −1.45
Popular comparisons
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.