IWFL vs. MTUL
IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and MTUL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while MTUL is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFL returned 12.16%/yr vs 15.55%/yr for MTUL. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
IWFL vs. MTUL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -3.79% return, which is significantly lower than MTUL's 38.03% 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%
MTUL
- 1D
- 1.89%
- 1M
- -13.31%
- 6M
- 35.38%
- YTD
- 38.03%
- 1Y
- 49.92%
- 3Y*
- 45.94%
- 5Y*
- 15.55%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 14.25%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $7.49K | $14.18K | $17.14K | |
| $228.72K | $153.30K | $113.30K |
IWFL vs. MTUL - 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% |
MTUL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN | 38.03% | 27.42% | 58.70% | 10.66% | -37.97% | 8.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWFL and MTUL is 0.67, 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. | 0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.79 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021 | 0.79 |
The correlation between IWFL and MTUL shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (1 year) to 0.79 (3 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. MTUL — Risk / Return Rank
IWFL
MTUL
IWFL vs. MTUL - 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 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL). 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 | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.90 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.19 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.25 | 1.49 | -1.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.73 | 6.15 | -5.42 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWFL vs. MTUL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, roughly equal to the maximum MTUL drawdown of -56.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and MTUL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWFL | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.29% | -56.83% | -2.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.80% | -32.27% | -0.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -46.84% | -39.15% | -7.69% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.29% | -56.83% | -2.46% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.19% | -22.74% | +7.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.68% | -22.29% | +2.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.34% | 7.79% | +3.55% |
Volatility
IWFL vs. MTUL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) is 13.36%, while ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) has a volatility of 26.81%. This indicates that IWFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWFL | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.36% | 26.81% | -13.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 30.04% | 50.13% | -20.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.73% | 56.27% | -19.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 47.31% | 45.40% | +1.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 46.34% | 45.65% | +0.69% |
IWFL vs. MTUL - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both IWFL and MTUL have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
IWFL vs. MTUL - Dividend Comparison
Neither IWFL nor MTUL has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
IWFL and MTUL have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MTUL has higher volatility (26.81%) compared to IWFL (13.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs MTUL's -56.83%.
On 5-year performance, MTUL leads with 15.55% vs 12.16% for IWFL. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. 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.
Over the 5-year period, MTUL has performed better with a 15.55% return vs 12.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWFL and MTUL have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
IWFL and MTUL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
IWFL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while MTUL is Momentum. IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while MTUL tracks MSCI USA Momentum Index.
MTUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.85 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 MTUL
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