IWFL vs. DBE
IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and DBE (Invesco DB Energy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while DBE is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the DBIQ Optimum Yield Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFL returned 13.72%/yr vs 16.54%/yr for DBE. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.78%/yr for DBE.
Performance
IWFL vs. DBE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a 1.62% return, which is significantly lower than DBE's 66.08% return.
IWFL
- 1D
- -3.80%
- 1M
- -0.34%
- 6M
- 0.05%
- YTD
- 1.62%
- 1Y
- 20.72%
- 3Y*
- 30.04%
- 5Y*
- 13.72%
- 10Y*
- —
DBE
- 1D
- 6.87%
- 1M
- -1.18%
- 6M
- 62.18%
- YTD
- 66.08%
- 1Y
- 53.22%
- 3Y*
- 17.13%
- 5Y*
- 16.54%
- 10Y*
- 11.15%
IWFL vs. DBE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN | 1.62% | 18.54% | 61.94% | 84.47% | -55.71% | 46.03% |
DBE Invesco DB Energy Fund | 66.08% | -2.17% | 2.96% | -12.14% | 33.77% | 39.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWFL and DBE is -0.26, 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 | -0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021 | 0.03 |
The correlation between IWFL and DBE shifts across timeframes, from -0.26 (1 year) to 0.04 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
IWFL vs. DBE — Risk / Return Rank
IWFL
DBE
IWFL vs. DBE - 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 Invesco DB Energy Fund (DBE). 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 | DBE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.89 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | 1.26 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.63 | 2.16 | -1.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.92 | 6.57 | -4.65 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWFL vs. DBE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, smaller than the maximum DBE drawdown of -86.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and DBE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWFL | DBE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.29% | -86.69% | +27.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.80% | -24.72% | -8.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -46.84% | -24.72% | -22.12% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.29% | -38.74% | -20.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -60.84% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.42% | -36.95% | +26.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.74% | -57.20% | +37.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.81% | 8.13% | +2.68% |
Volatility
IWFL vs. DBE - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a higher volatility of 14.41% compared to Invesco DB Energy Fund (DBE) at 12.49%. This indicates that IWFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWFL | DBE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.41% | 12.49% | +1.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.79% | 32.73% | -3.94% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 35.17% | 36.03% | -0.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 47.15% | 29.89% | +17.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 46.33% | 28.40% | +17.93% |
IWFL vs. DBE - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than DBE's 0.78% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWFL vs. DBE - Dividend Comparison
IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.33%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBE Invesco DB Energy Fund | 2.33% | 3.86% | 6.32% | 3.87% | 0.75% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.79% | 1.67% |
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% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWFL and DBE have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWFL has higher volatility (14.41%) compared to DBE (12.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs DBE's -86.69%.
On 5-year performance, DBE leads with 16.54% vs 13.72% for IWFL. On fees, DBE is cheaper at 0.78% per year. On volatility, DBE has been the lower-risk option at 12.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, DBE has performed better with a 16.54% return vs 13.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DBE is cheaper with a 0.78% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.
DBE has the higher dividend yield at 2.33%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.
IWFL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while DBE is Oil & Gas. IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while DBE tracks DBIQ Optimum Yield Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 0.78% for DBE.
DBE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 0.59), 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.
Find the right allocation for IWFL and DBE
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer