IWFL vs. NIOG
IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and NIOG (Leverage Shares 2X Long NIO Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds - IWFL tracks the Russell 1000 Growth (200%) while NIOG tracks the NIO Inc. (NIO). Both are passively managed. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for NIOG.
Performance
IWFL vs. NIOG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -3.75% return, which is significantly higher than NIOG's -30.21% return.
IWFL
- 1D
- -2.43%
- 1M
- -11.21%
- YTD
- -3.75%
- 6M
- -6.77%
- 1Y
- 20.21%
- 3Y*
- 31.77%
- 5Y*
- 13.92%
- 10Y*
- —
NIOG
- 1D
- -7.05%
- 1M
- -21.38%
- YTD
- -30.21%
- 6M
- -25.91%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWFL vs. NIOG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN | -3.75% | 5.19% |
NIOG Leverage Shares 2X Long NIO Daily ETF | -30.21% | 3.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWFL and NIOG is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2025 | 0.22 |
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. NIOG — Risk / Return Rank
IWFL
NIOG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IWFL vs. NIOG - 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 Leverage Shares 2X Long NIO Daily ETF (NIOG). 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 | NIOG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.62 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.92 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWFL vs. NIOG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, which is greater than NIOG's maximum drawdown of -56.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and NIOG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWFL | NIOG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.29% | -56.27% | -3.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.80% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -46.84% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.29% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.16% | -56.27% | +41.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.81% | -22.75% | +2.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.56% | — | — |
Volatility
IWFL vs. NIOG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWFL | NIOG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.98% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.49% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 33.29% | 115.62% | -82.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 46.88% | 115.62% | -68.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 46.23% | 115.62% | -69.39% |
IWFL vs. NIOG - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NIOG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWFL vs. NIOG - Dividend Comparison
Neither IWFL nor NIOG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
IWFL and NIOG have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NIOG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NIOG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.
IWFL and NIOG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while NIOG tracks NIO Inc. (NIO). They also come from different issuers: UBS and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 0.75% for NIOG.
Find the right allocation for IWFL and NIOG
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