RWIN vs THOR
Rayliant NxtGen Multifactor International Equity ETF vs Thornburg Premium Income Builder ETF
Which is better, RWIN or THOR?
RWIN costs less.
RWIN has a lower expense ratio. RWIN is less concentrated, with 20.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 30.9%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | RWIN | THOR |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.42%Best | 0.79% |
| AUM | $20M | $35M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.96% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 333 | 59 |
| YTD Return | +4.31%Best | +0.73% |
| Top 10 Weight | 20.6%Best | 30.9% |
| Fund Family | Rayliant Asset Management | Thornburg Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 8, 2026 | Jun 22, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
RWIN vs THOR growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
RWIN vs THOR Performance
Rayliant NxtGen Multifactor International Equity ETF (RWIN) is an ETF from Rayliant Asset Management and Thornburg Premium Income Builder ETF (THOR) is an ETF from Thornburg Investment Management. Year to date, RWIN is up 4.31% versus a gain of 0.73% for THOR.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
RWIN charges 0.42% per year while THOR charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $42 vs $79 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RWIN currently yields 0.96% against 0.00% for THOR.
Holdings Overlap
4.7% of RWIN's money is in holdings THOR also owns. 6.6% of THOR's money is in holdings RWIN also owns.
THOR and RWIN share little of their money.
4 positions in common, counted across the 166 positions we hold weights for in RWIN and 54 in THOR, against full books of 333 and 59.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 15 positions for THOR that do not appear in our book for RWIN (30.1% of the fund), and 2 for RWIN that do not appear in THOR (1.7%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of RWIN and THOR you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, RWIN or THOR?
RWIN has an expense ratio of 0.42% while THOR charges 0.79%. RWIN is the cheaper option, by $37 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between RWIN and THOR?
6.6% of THOR's money is in holdings RWIN also owns. 6.6% of THOR's is in holdings RWIN also owns. They hold 4 positions in common, counted across the 166 positions we hold weights for in RWIN and 54 in THOR.
Which pays a higher dividend, RWIN or THOR?
RWIN yields 0.96% while THOR yields 0.00%, so RWIN currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is THOR better than RWIN?
RWIN has a lower expense ratio. RWIN is less concentrated, with 20.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 30.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.