IWFG vs. MNA

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

IWFG (NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF) and MNA (IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by New York Life, while MNA is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the IQ Merger Arbitrage Index. IWFG is actively managed, while MNA is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IWFG returned 23.55%/yr vs 5.68%/yr for MNA. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWFG charges 0.46%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for MNA.

Performance

IWFG vs. MNA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) and IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFG achieves a 3.42% return, which is significantly higher than MNA's 1.44% return.

IWFG

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 5.50%
• YTD: 3.42%
• 6M: 2.17%
• 1Y: 14.11%
• 3Y*: 23.55%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MNA

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: -0.12%
• YTD: 1.44%
• 6M: 1.41%
• 1Y: 3.76%
• 3Y*: 5.68%
• 5Y*: 1.96%
• 10Y*: 2.69%

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

IWFG vs. MNA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IWFG NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF	3.42%	14.33%	37.56%	38.40%	3.75%
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF	1.44%	8.59%	4.93%	0.18%	2.79%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFG and MNA is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.25
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2022	0.32

IWFG vs. MNA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWFG	MNA
Technology	52.4%	8.3%
Communication Services	13.3%	9.2%
Consumer Cyclical	11.0%	2.4%
Industrials	7.5%	22.3%
Healthcare	5.5%	11.3%
Financial Services	4.8%	11.4%
Utilities	4.0%	15.3%
Basic Materials	-	10.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.4%
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	5.1%

Return for Risk

IWFG vs. MNA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFG

IWFG Risk / Return Rank: 22
IWFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
IWFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
IWFG Omega Ratio Rank: 23
IWFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
IWFG Martin Ratio Rank: 20

MNA

MNA Risk / Return Rank: 34
MNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
MNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
MNA Omega Ratio Rank: 22
MNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
MNA Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

IWFG vs. MNA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) and IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA). 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.

	IWFG	MNA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.86	0.80	+0.06
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.25	1.19	+0.06
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.14	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.73	2.88	-2.15
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.15	7.28	-5.13
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWFG vs. MNA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.86, which is comparable to the MNA Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFG and MNA, 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

	IWFG	MNA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86	0.80	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.40	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.41	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.18	0.36	+0.82

Drawdowns

IWFG vs. MNA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFG drawdown since its inception was -21.97%, which is greater than MNA's maximum drawdown of -16.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFG and MNA.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFG	MNA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.97%	-16.68%	-5.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.20%	-1.40%	-18.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.97%	-3.01%	-18.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-10.45%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-16.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.52%	-0.89%	-0.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.13%	-2.83%	-1.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.89%	0.55%	+6.34%

Volatility

IWFG vs. MNA - Volatility Comparison

NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) has a higher volatility of 3.55% compared to IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) at 1.85%. This indicates that IWFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MNA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWFG	MNA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.55%	1.85%	+1.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.54%	3.56%	+8.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.45%	4.74%	+11.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.48%	5.00%	+15.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.48%	6.55%	+13.93%

IWFG vs. MNA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFG has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than MNA's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFG vs. MNA - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWFG nor MNA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWFG NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	5.44%	1.01%	0.05%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.20%	0.00%	0.00%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.21%	0.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFG and MNA in my portfolio?

IWFG and MNA have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWFG or MNA?

IWFG has higher volatility (3.55%) compared to MNA (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFG dropped -21.97% vs MNA's -16.68%.

Which ETF is better, IWFG or MNA?

On 3-year performance, IWFG leads with 23.55% vs 5.68% for MNA. On fees, IWFG is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, MNA has been the lower-risk option at 1.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWFG or MNA?

Over the 3-year period, IWFG has performed better with a 23.55% return vs 5.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWFG or MNA?

IWFG is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for MNA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWFG or MNA?

IWFG and MNA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between IWFG and MNA?

IWFG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while MNA is Hedge Fund. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for IWFG and 0.77% for MNA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.86 vs 0.80), 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.