IWFL vs. HDLB
IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and HDLB (ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged US High Dividend Low Volatility ETN Series B) are both Leveraged Equities funds from UBS - IWFL tracks the Russell 1000 Growth (200%) while HDLB tracks the Solactive US High Dividend Low Volatility (USD)(TR) (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFL returned 12.16%/yr vs 14.37%/yr for HDLB. Their 0.23 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.65%/yr for HDLB.
Performance
IWFL vs. HDLB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -3.79% return, which is significantly lower than HDLB's 25.12% return.
IWFL
- 1D
- 2.19%
- 1M
- -4.76%
- 6M
- -0.09%
- YTD
- -3.79%
- 1Y
- 12.27%
- 3Y*
- 26.94%
- 5Y*
- 12.16%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 15.51%
HDLB
- 1D
- -0.60%
- 1M
- 6.28%
- 6M
- 12.18%
- YTD
- 25.12%
- 1Y
- 26.69%
- 3Y*
- 29.45%
- 5Y*
- 14.37%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 6.16%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $77.42K | $57.41K | $57.55K | |
| $7.49K | $14.18K | $17.14K |
IWFL vs. HDLB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN | -3.79% | 18.54% | 61.94% | 84.47% | -55.71% | 46.03% |
HDLB ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged US High Dividend Low Volatility ETN Series B | 25.12% | 27.26% | 28.21% | -4.12% | -11.46% | 45.96% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWFL and HDLB is -0.16, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021 | 0.23 |
The correlation between IWFL and HDLB shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.23 (all time), 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. HDLB — Risk / Return Rank
IWFL
HDLB
IWFL vs. HDLB - 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 Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged US High Dividend Low Volatility ETN Series B (HDLB). 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 | HDLB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.76 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.93 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.18 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.25 | 1.74 | -1.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.73 | 3.74 | -3.01 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWFL vs. HDLB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, smaller than the maximum HDLB drawdown of -78.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and HDLB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWFL | HDLB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.29% | -78.70% | +19.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.80% | -16.17% | -16.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -46.84% | -20.94% | -25.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.29% | -43.81% | -15.48% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.19% | -5.63% | -9.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.68% | -27.01% | +7.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.34% | 7.51% | +3.83% |
Volatility
IWFL vs. HDLB - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a higher volatility of 13.36% compared to ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged US High Dividend Low Volatility ETN Series B (HDLB) at 11.39%. This indicates that IWFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HDLB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWFL | HDLB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.36% | 11.39% | +1.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 30.04% | 22.35% | +7.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.73% | 28.72% | +8.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 47.31% | 31.06% | +16.25% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 46.34% | 43.43% | +2.91% |
IWFL vs. HDLB - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than HDLB's 1.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWFL vs. HDLB - Dividend Comparison
IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HDLB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.19%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HDLB ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged US High Dividend Low Volatility ETN Series B | 10.19% | 12.20% | 10.09% | 12.36% | 10.86% | 8.07% | 16.23% | 0.97% |
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% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWFL and HDLB have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWFL has higher volatility (13.36%) compared to HDLB (11.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs HDLB's -78.70%.
On 5-year performance, HDLB leads with 14.37% vs 12.16% for IWFL. On fees, IWFL is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, HDLB has been the lower-risk option at 11.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, HDLB has performed better with a 14.37% return vs 12.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWFL is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.65% for HDLB.
HDLB has the higher dividend yield at 10.19%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.
IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while HDLB tracks Solactive US High Dividend Low Volatility (USD)(TR) (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 1.65% for HDLB.
HDLB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.98 vs 0.23), 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 HDLB
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