IWFL vs. AMUB

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB).

IWFL and AMUB are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IWFL is a passively managed fund by UBS that tracks the performance of the Russell 1000 Growth (200%). It was launched on Feb 5, 2021. AMUB is a passively managed fund by UBS that tracks the performance of the Alerian MLP Index. It was launched on Oct 8, 2015. Both IWFL and AMUB are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

IWFL vs. AMUB - Performance Comparison

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

IWFL vs. AMUB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	-20.92%	18.54%	61.94%	84.47%	-55.71%	46.03%
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B	16.54%	8.70%	23.05%	25.39%	29.89%	26.12%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -20.92% return, which is significantly lower than AMUB's 16.54% return.

IWFL

• 1D: 8.62%
• 1M: -7.73%
• YTD: -20.92%
• 6M: -20.42%
• 1Y: 19.37%
• 3Y*: 29.85%
• 5Y*: 13.29%
• 10Y*: —

AMUB

• 1D: -1.33%
• 1M: 1.05%
• YTD: 16.54%
• 6M: 20.87%
• 1Y: 12.97%
• 3Y*: 23.44%
• 5Y*: 23.20%
• 10Y*: 10.32%

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

IWFL vs. AMUB - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

IWFL

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN

AMUB

ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B

Return for Risk

IWFL vs. AMUB — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFL

IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 28
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 36
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 25

AMUB

AMUB Risk / Return Rank: 33
AMUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
AMUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
AMUB Omega Ratio Rank: 39
AMUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
AMUB Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

IWFL vs. AMUB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) 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.

	IWFL	AMUB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.35	0.69	-0.34
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.93	0.98	-0.05
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.15	-0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.60	0.72	-0.12
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.92	1.85	+0.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWFL vs. AMUB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFL Sharpe Ratio is 0.35, which is lower than the AMUB Sharpe Ratio of 0.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFL and AMUB, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWFL	AMUB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35	0.69	-0.34
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	1.17	-0.88
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.39	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	0.26	0.00

Correlation

The correlation between IWFL and AMUB is 0.31, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

IWFL vs. AMUB - Dividend Comparison

IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AMUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.79%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B	5.79%	6.54%	6.02%	6.54%	6.35%	7.34%	10.94%	8.36%	8.48%	7.00%	6.61%	2.25%

Drawdowns

IWFL vs. AMUB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, smaller than the maximum AMUB drawdown of -73.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and AMUB.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFL	AMUB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.29%	-73.13%	+13.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.80%	-17.04%	-15.76%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.29%	-20.58%	-38.71%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.01%	-2.96%	-24.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.34%	-14.32%	-6.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.30%	6.62%	+3.68%

Volatility

IWFL vs. AMUB - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a higher volatility of 15.12% compared to ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) at 3.54%. This indicates that IWFL'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

	IWFL	AMUB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.12%	3.54%	+11.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.96%	8.96%	+18.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	55.71%	18.90%	+36.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.77%	20.01%	+26.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.78%	26.89%	+19.89%