IWFL vs. SLVO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and SLVO (UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while SLVO is a Silver fund tracking the Credit Suisse NASDAQ Silver FLOWS 106 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IWFL returned 27.71% vs 38.83% for SLVO. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for SLVO.

Performance

IWFL vs. SLVO - 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 UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN (SLVO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -0.55% return, which is significantly higher than SLVO's -0.85% return.

IWFL

• 1D: -2.52%
• 1M: -7.42%
• YTD: -0.55%
• 6M: -3.20%
• 1Y: 27.71%
• 3Y*: 32.31%
• 5Y*: 14.74%
• 10Y*: —

SLVO

• 1D: -5.10%
• 1M: -12.72%
• YTD: -0.85%
• 6M: -1.19%
• 1Y: 38.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IWFL vs. SLVO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	-0.55%	18.54%	31.81%
SLVO UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN	-0.85%	71.20%	0.94%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFL and SLVO is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2024	0.26

Return for Risk

IWFL vs. SLVO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IWFL

IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 23
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 25
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 22

SLVO

SLVO Risk / Return Rank: 41
SLVO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
SLVO Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
SLVO Omega Ratio Rank: 43
SLVO Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
SLVO Martin Ratio Rank: 50

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

IWFL vs. SLVO - 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 UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN (SLVO). 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	SLVO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.84	1.24	-0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.27	1.57	-0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.27	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.85	2.26	-1.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.65	8.21	-5.57

IWFL vs. SLVO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFL Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is lower than the SLVO Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFL and SLVO, 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. SLVO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, which is greater than SLVO's maximum drawdown of -17.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and SLVO.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFL	SLVO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.29%	-17.23%	-42.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.80%	-17.23%	-15.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-46.84%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.34%	-15.44%	+3.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.82%	-3.29%	-16.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.49%	4.74%	+5.75%

Volatility

IWFL vs. SLVO - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) and UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN (SLVO) have volatilities of 10.92% and 10.77%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWFL	SLVO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.92%	10.77%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.51%	29.34%	-2.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.32%	31.36%	+1.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.86%	26.00%	+20.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.25%	26.00%	+20.25%

IWFL vs. SLVO - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SLVO's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFL vs. SLVO - Dividend Comparison

IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SLVO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 66.91%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SLVO UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN	66.91%	19.35%	14.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFL and SLVO in my portfolio?

IWFL and SLVO have a correlation of 0.33, 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 SLVO?

IWFL has higher volatility (10.92%) compared to SLVO (10.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs SLVO's -17.23%.

Which ETF is better, IWFL or SLVO?

On 1-year performance, SLVO leads with 38.83% vs 27.71% for IWFL. On fees, SLVO is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, SLVO has been the lower-risk option at 10.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWFL or SLVO?

Over the 1-year period, SLVO has performed better with a 38.83% return vs 27.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWFL or SLVO?

SLVO is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.

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

SLVO has the higher dividend yield at 66.91%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.

What is the main difference between IWFL and SLVO?

IWFL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while SLVO is Silver. IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while SLVO tracks Credit Suisse NASDAQ Silver FLOWS 106 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 0.65% for SLVO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SLVO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 0.84), 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.