FBGX vs. IWFL

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FBGX (UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN) and IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds from UBS - FBGX tracks the Russell 1000 Growth Index (200%) while IWFL tracks the Russell 1000 Growth (200%). Both are passively managed. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FBGX charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for IWFL.

Performance

FBGX vs. IWFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN (FBGX) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

FBGX

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IWFL

• 1D: -0.80%
• 1M: 12.28%
• YTD: 12.54%
• 6M: 10.59%
• 1Y: 48.76%
• 3Y*: 39.45%
• 5Y*: 20.43%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FBGX vs. IWFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FBGX UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN	0.00%	0.00%	35.73%	83.74%	-56.41%	44.91%
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	12.54%	18.54%	61.94%	84.47%	-55.71%	46.03%

Correlation

The correlation between FBGX and IWFL is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.48
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021	0.76

The correlation between FBGX and IWFL shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (3 years) to 0.76 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FBGX vs. IWFL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IWFL

IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 37
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 40
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 32

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FBGX vs. IWFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN (FBGX) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FBGX	IWFL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.53	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.44	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	0.42	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	FBGX	IWFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-59.29%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-32.80%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-46.84%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-59.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-0.80%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-19.95%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	10.28%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FBGX	IWFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.11%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	25.11%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	31.98%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	46.68%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	46.29%	—

FBGX vs. IWFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBGX has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than IWFL's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBGX vs. IWFL - Dividend Comparison

Neither FBGX nor IWFL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBGX and IWFL in my portfolio?

FBGX and IWFL have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FBGX or IWFL?

On fees, IWFL is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBGX or IWFL?

IWFL is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for FBGX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBGX or IWFL?

FBGX and IWFL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FBGX and IWFL?

FBGX tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index (200%), while IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%). Their fees differ too: 1.29% for FBGX and 0.95% for IWFL.