IWFL vs. BRKW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and BRKW (Roundhill BRKB WeeklyPay ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while BRKW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Roundhill. IWFL is passively managed, while BRKW is actively managed. Over the past year, IWFL returned 27.71% vs -2.44% for BRKW. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for BRKW.

Performance

IWFL vs. BRKW - 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 Roundhill BRKB WeeklyPay ETF (BRKW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -0.55% return, which is significantly higher than BRKW's -3.91% return.

IWFL

• 1D: -2.52%
• 1M: -7.42%
• YTD: -0.55%
• 6M: -3.20%
• 1Y: 27.71%
• 3Y*: 32.31%
• 5Y*: 14.74%
• 10Y*: —

BRKW

• 1D: 1.29%
• 1M: 1.43%
• YTD: -3.91%
• 6M: -3.53%
• 1Y: -2.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IWFL vs. BRKW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	-0.55%	29.47%
BRKW Roundhill BRKB WeeklyPay ETF	-3.91%	1.85%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFL and BRKW is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	-0.06

Return for Risk

IWFL vs. BRKW — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFL

IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 23
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 25
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 22

BRKW

BRKW Risk / Return Rank: 7
BRKW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
BRKW Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
BRKW Omega Ratio Rank: 7
BRKW Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
BRKW Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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. BRKW - 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 Roundhill BRKB WeeklyPay ETF (BRKW). 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.

	IWFL	BRKW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.84	-0.14	+0.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.27	-0.08	+1.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	0.99	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.85	-0.19	+1.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.65	-0.39	+3.03

IWFL vs. BRKW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFL Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is higher than the BRKW Sharpe Ratio of -0.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFL and BRKW, 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

IWFL vs. BRKW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, which is greater than BRKW's maximum drawdown of -12.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and BRKW.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFL	BRKW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.29%	-12.64%	-46.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.80%	-12.64%	-20.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-46.84%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.34%	-6.97%	-5.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.82%	-5.45%	-14.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.49%	6.35%	+4.14%

Volatility

IWFL vs. BRKW - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a higher volatility of 10.92% compared to Roundhill BRKB WeeklyPay ETF (BRKW) at 4.52%. This indicates that IWFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BRKW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWFL	BRKW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.92%	4.52%	+6.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.51%	12.76%	+13.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.32%	17.21%	+16.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.86%	17.14%	+29.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.25%	17.14%	+29.11%

IWFL vs. BRKW - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than BRKW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFL vs. BRKW - Dividend Comparison

IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BRKW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 25.43%.

Position	TTM	2025
BRKW Roundhill BRKB WeeklyPay ETF	25.43%	14.45%
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFL and BRKW in my portfolio?

IWFL and BRKW have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWFL or BRKW?

IWFL has higher volatility (10.92%) compared to BRKW (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs BRKW's -12.64%.

Which ETF is better, IWFL or BRKW?

On 1-year performance, IWFL leads with 27.71% vs -2.44% for BRKW. On fees, IWFL is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, BRKW has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWFL or BRKW?

Over the 1-year period, IWFL has performed better with a 27.71% return vs -2.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWFL or BRKW?

IWFL is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for BRKW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWFL or BRKW?

BRKW has the higher dividend yield at 25.43%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.

What is the main difference between IWFL and BRKW?

IWFL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BRKW is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 0.99% for BRKW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.84 vs -0.14), 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.