IWDL vs. AMUB

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWDL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN) and AMUB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B) are both exchange-traded funds - IWDL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Value (200%), while AMUB is a MLPs fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWDL returned 14.46%/yr vs 11.55%/yr for AMUB. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWDL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for AMUB.

Performance

IWDL vs. AMUB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN (IWDL) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWDL achieves a 28.58% return, which is significantly higher than AMUB's 14.01% return.

IWDL

• 1D: -1.65%
• 1M: 3.97%
• YTD: 28.58%
• 6M: 26.90%
• 1Y: 53.41%
• 3Y*: 29.95%
• 5Y*: 14.46%
• 10Y*: —

AMUB

• 1D: 1.92%
• 1M: -7.94%
• YTD: 14.01%
• 6M: 13.63%
• 1Y: 13.10%
• 3Y*: 15.44%
• 5Y*: 11.55%
• 10Y*: 2.79%

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

IWDL vs. AMUB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWDL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN	28.58%	25.02%	20.68%	13.50%	-21.27%	40.35%
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B	14.01%	2.05%	15.68%	16.89%	21.91%	17.90%

Correlation

The correlation between IWDL and AMUB is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.42
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.52

Over the past year, the correlation between IWDL and AMUB has dropped to 0.18 - well below their long-term average of 0.52, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

IWDL vs. AMUB — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWDL

IWDL Risk / Return Rank: 78
IWDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
IWDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
IWDL Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IWDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
IWDL Martin Ratio Rank: 84

AMUB

AMUB Risk / Return Rank: 27
AMUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
AMUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
AMUB Omega Ratio Rank: 26
AMUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
AMUB Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

IWDL vs. AMUB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN (IWDL) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	IWDL	AMUB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	0.96	+1.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	1.40	+1.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.17	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.97	1.24	+2.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.20	3.36	+12.84

IWDL vs. AMUB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWDL Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is higher than the AMUB Sharpe Ratio of 0.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWDL and AMUB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IWDL vs. AMUB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWDL drawdown since its inception was -37.95%, smaller than the maximum AMUB drawdown of -79.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWDL and AMUB.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWDL	AMUB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.95%	-79.46%	+41.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.53%	-10.69%	-2.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.78%	-17.22%	-14.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.95%	-20.58%	-17.37%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-78.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.12%	-8.53%	+6.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.50%	-29.11%	+18.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.31%	3.92%	-0.61%

Volatility

IWDL vs. AMUB - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN (IWDL) has a higher volatility of 7.25% compared to ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) at 5.28%. This indicates that IWDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AMUB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWDL	AMUB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.25%	5.28%	+1.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.33%	10.09%	+8.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.35%	13.85%	+9.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.33%	20.12%	+10.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.00%	27.13%	+2.87%

IWDL vs. AMUB - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWDL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than AMUB's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWDL vs. AMUB - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWDL nor AMUB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWDL and AMUB in my portfolio?

IWDL and AMUB have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWDL or AMUB?

IWDL has higher volatility (7.25%) compared to AMUB (5.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWDL dropped -37.95% vs AMUB's -79.46%.

Which ETF is better, IWDL or AMUB?

On 5-year performance, IWDL leads with 14.46% vs 11.55% for AMUB. On fees, AMUB is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, AMUB has been the lower-risk option at 5.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWDL or AMUB?

Over the 5-year period, IWDL has performed better with a 14.46% return vs 11.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWDL or AMUB?

AMUB is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWDL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWDL or AMUB?

IWDL and AMUB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between IWDL and AMUB?

IWDL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while AMUB is MLPs. IWDL tracks Russell 1000 Value (200%), while AMUB tracks Alerian MLP Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWDL and 0.80% for AMUB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 0.96), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.