IWDL vs. USML

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWDL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN) and USML (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds from UBS - IWDL tracks the Russell 1000 Value (200%) while USML tracks the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWDL returned 13.39%/yr vs 8.22%/yr for USML. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

IWDL vs. USML - 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 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWDL achieves a 28.10% return, which is significantly higher than USML's 3.50% return.

IWDL

• 1D: 1.23%
• 1M: 6.86%
• YTD: 28.10%
• 6M: 29.30%
• 1Y: 56.29%
• 3Y*: 30.80%
• 5Y*: 13.39%
• 10Y*: —

USML

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: 4.12%
• YTD: 3.50%
• 6M: 3.37%
• 1Y: 4.24%
• 3Y*: 16.67%
• 5Y*: 8.22%
• 10Y*: —

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

IWDL vs. USML - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWDL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN	28.10%	25.02%	20.68%	13.50%	-21.27%	40.35%
USML ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN	3.50%	9.33%	23.97%	11.37%	-22.87%	42.12%

Correlation

The correlation between IWDL and USML is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021	0.83

The correlation between IWDL and USML shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.84 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IWDL vs. USML — 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: 76
IWDL Omega Ratio Rank: 73
IWDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
IWDL Martin Ratio Rank: 84

USML

USML Risk / Return Rank: 13
USML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
USML Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
USML Omega Ratio Rank: 13
USML Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
USML Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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. USML - 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 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML). 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.

	IWDL	USML	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.49	0.26	+2.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.34	0.47	+2.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.06	+0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.18	0.33	+3.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.20	0.98	+16.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWDL vs. USML - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWDL Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is higher than the USML Sharpe Ratio of 0.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWDL and USML, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWDL	USML	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.49	0.26	+2.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	0.34	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.61	0.44	+0.17

Drawdowns

IWDL vs. USML - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWDL drawdown since its inception was -37.95%, which is greater than USML's maximum drawdown of -35.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWDL and USML.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWDL	USML	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.95%	-35.34%	-2.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.53%	-13.09%	-0.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.78%	-19.14%	-12.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.95%	-35.34%	-2.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-3.19%	+3.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.59%	-10.41%	-0.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.28%	4.33%	-1.05%

Volatility

IWDL vs. USML - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN (IWDL) has a higher volatility of 5.51% compared to ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) at 4.24%. This indicates that IWDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USML based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWDL	USML	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.51%	4.24%	+1.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.64%	11.45%	+6.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.76%	16.39%	+6.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.29%	24.47%	+5.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.01%	24.28%	+5.73%

IWDL vs. USML - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IWDL and USML have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

IWDL vs. USML - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWDL nor USML has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWDL and USML in my portfolio?

IWDL and USML have a correlation of 0.70, 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 USML?

IWDL has higher volatility (5.51%) compared to USML (4.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWDL dropped -37.95% vs USML's -35.34%.

Which ETF is better, IWDL or USML?

On 5-year performance, IWDL leads with 13.39% vs 8.22% for USML. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, USML has been the lower-risk option at 4.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWDL or USML?

Over the 5-year period, IWDL has performed better with a 13.39% return vs 8.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWDL or USML?

IWDL and USML have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

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

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

What is the main difference between IWDL and USML?

IWDL tracks Russell 1000 Value (200%), while USML tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.49 vs 0.26), 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.