IWFL vs. IFED

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and IFED (ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds from UBS - IWFL tracks the Russell 1000 Growth (200%) while IFED tracks the IFED Large-Cap US Equity Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IWFL returned 26.94%/yr vs 18.74%/yr for IFED. Their 0.72 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for IFED.

Performance

IWFL vs. IFED - 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 IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN (IFED). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -3.79% return, which is significantly lower than IFED's 10.03% 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%

IFED

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 13.92%
• 6M: 14.63%
• YTD: 10.03%
• 1Y: 14.76%
• 3Y*: 18.74%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.40%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IFED ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN	$159.79K	$83.84K	$44.71K
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	$7.49K	$14.18K	$17.14K

IWFL vs. IFED - 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%	12.54%
IFED ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN	10.03%	15.02%	23.04%	20.78%	-1.46%	8.46%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFL and IFED is 0.52, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.52
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2021	0.72

The correlation between IWFL and IFED shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.72 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IWFL vs. IFED — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IWFL

IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 16
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 17
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 16

IFED

IFED Risk / Return Rank: 24
IFED Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
IFED Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
IFED Omega Ratio Rank: 30
IFED Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
IFED Martin Ratio Rank: 25

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IWFL vs. IFED - 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 IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN (IFED). 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	IFED	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.23	0.44	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.57	0.84	-0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.14	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.25	0.64	-0.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.73	2.01	-1.27

IWFL vs. IFED - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFL Sharpe Ratio is 0.23, which is lower than the IFED Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFL and IFED, 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. IFED - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, which is greater than IFED's maximum drawdown of -22.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and IFED.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFL	IFED	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.29%	-22.36%	-36.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.80%	-20.18%	-12.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-46.84%	-22.36%	-24.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.19%	-7.61%	-7.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.68%	-5.85%	-13.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.34%	6.43%	+4.91%

Volatility

IWFL vs. IFED - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) is 13.36%, while ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN (IFED) has a volatility of 24.07%. This indicates that IWFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IFED based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWFL	IFED	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.36%	24.07%	-10.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	30.04%	27.96%	+2.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.73%	29.34%	+7.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.31%	22.56%	+24.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.34%	22.56%	+23.78%

IWFL vs. IFED - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IFED's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFL vs. IFED - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWFL nor IFED has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFL and IFED in my portfolio?

IWFL and IFED have a correlation of 0.52, 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 IFED?

IFED has higher volatility (24.07%) compared to IWFL (13.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs IFED's -22.36%.

Which ETF is better, IWFL or IFED?

On 3-year performance, IWFL leads with 26.94% vs 18.74% for IFED. On fees, IFED is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, IWFL has been the lower-risk option at 13.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWFL or IFED?

Over the 3-year period, IWFL has performed better with a 26.94% return vs 18.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWFL or IFED?

IFED is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.

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

IWFL and IFED have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between IWFL and IFED?

IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while IFED tracks IFED Large-Cap US Equity Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 0.45% for IFED.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IFED currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.44 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.