IWDL vs. CSHP

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

IWDL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWDL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Value (200%), while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. IWDL is passively managed, while CSHP is actively managed. Over the past year, IWDL returned 58.75% vs 3.96% for CSHP. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWDL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.

Performance

IWDL vs. CSHP - 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 iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWDL achieves a 30.74% return, which is significantly higher than CSHP's 1.86% return.

IWDL

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 5.72%
• YTD: 30.74%
• 6M: 29.25%
• 1Y: 58.75%
• 3Y*: 30.67%
• 5Y*: 15.13%
• 10Y*: —

CSHP

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 1.86%
• 6M: 1.93%
• 1Y: 3.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IWDL vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IWDL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN	30.74%	25.02%	0.96%
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.86%	4.10%	2.24%

Correlation

The correlation between IWDL and CSHP is -0.10, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024	0.05

The correlation between IWDL and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IWDL vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWDL

IWDL Risk / Return Rank: 82
IWDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
IWDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
IWDL Omega Ratio Rank: 75
IWDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
IWDL Martin Ratio Rank: 87

CSHP

CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 99
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. CSHP - 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 iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.54	11.22	-8.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.37	28.31	-24.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	6.67	-5.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.36	65.84	-61.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.83	395.75	-377.92

IWDL vs. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWDL Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 11.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWDL and CSHP, 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. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWDL drawdown since its inception was -37.95%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWDL and CSHP.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWDL	CSHP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.95%	-0.08%	-37.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.53%	-0.06%	-13.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.78%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.48%	-0.01%	-0.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.51%	-0.00%	-10.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.30%	0.01%	+3.29%

Volatility

IWDL vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN (IWDL) has a higher volatility of 6.99% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.15%. This indicates that IWDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWDL	CSHP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.99%	0.15%	+6.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.24%	0.27%	+17.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.32%	0.36%	+22.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.32%	0.41%	+29.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.00%	0.41%	+29.59%

IWDL vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWDL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWDL vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

IWDL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CSHP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.91%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	3.91%	5.39%	1.96%
IWDL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWDL and CSHP in my portfolio?

IWDL and CSHP have a correlation of -0.10, 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 CSHP?

IWDL has higher volatility (6.99%) compared to CSHP (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWDL dropped -37.95% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, IWDL or CSHP?

On 1-year performance, IWDL leads with 58.75% vs 3.96% for CSHP. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWDL or CSHP?

Over the 1-year period, IWDL has performed better with a 58.75% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWDL or CSHP?

CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWDL.

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

CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 0.00% for IWDL.

What is the main difference between IWDL and CSHP?

IWDL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWDL and 0.20% for CSHP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.22 vs 2.54), 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.