IWFL vs. SSO

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and SSO (ProShares Ultra S&P500) are both Leveraged Equities funds - IWFL tracks the Russell 1000 Growth (200%) while SSO tracks the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFL returned 17.57%/yr vs 19.63%/yr for SSO. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for SSO.

Performance

IWFL vs. SSO - 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 ProShares Ultra S&P500 (SSO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a 6.19% return, which is significantly lower than SSO's 19.08% return.

IWFL

• 1D: 4.15%
• 1M: 0.06%
• YTD: 6.19%
• 6M: 7.94%
• 1Y: 38.55%
• 3Y*: 34.35%
• 5Y*: 17.57%
• 10Y*: —

SSO

• 1D: 3.47%
• 1M: 3.60%
• YTD: 19.08%
• 6M: 19.83%
• 1Y: 52.23%
• 3Y*: 34.86%
• 5Y*: 19.63%
• 10Y*: 24.51%

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

IWFL vs. SSO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	6.19%	18.54%	61.94%	84.47%	-55.71%	46.03%
SSO ProShares Ultra S&P500	19.08%	26.19%	43.48%	46.65%	-38.98%	51.09%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFL and SSO is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.93

The correlation between IWFL and SSO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IWFL vs. SSO — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFL

IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 31
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 34
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 28

SSO

SSO Risk / Return Rank: 69
SSO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
SSO Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
SSO Omega Ratio Rank: 68
SSO Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
SSO Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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. SSO - 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 ProShares Ultra S&P500 (SSO). 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	SSO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	2.13	-0.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.64	2.69	-1.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.36	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.18	2.89	-1.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.72	12.36	-8.64

IWFL vs. SSO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFL Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is lower than the SSO Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFL and SSO, 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. SSO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, smaller than the maximum SSO drawdown of -84.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and SSO.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFL	SSO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.29%	-84.67%	+25.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.80%	-18.17%	-14.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-46.84%	-35.21%	-11.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.29%	-46.73%	-12.56%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-59.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.39%	-1.64%	-4.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.86%	-19.54%	-0.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.40%	4.24%	+6.16%

Volatility

IWFL vs. SSO - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a higher volatility of 10.15% compared to ProShares Ultra S&P500 (SSO) at 9.28%. This indicates that IWFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SSO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWFL	SSO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.15%	9.28%	+0.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.55%	19.45%	+7.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.01%	24.68%	+8.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.80%	33.82%	+12.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.27%	35.98%	+10.29%

IWFL vs. SSO - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SSO's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFL vs. SSO - Dividend Comparison

IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SSO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SSO ProShares Ultra S&P500	0.62%	0.68%	0.85%	0.18%	0.50%	0.18%	0.20%	0.50%	0.75%	0.39%	0.51%	0.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFL and SSO in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, IWFL and SSO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, IWFL or SSO?

IWFL has higher volatility (10.15%) compared to SSO (9.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs SSO's -84.67%.

Which ETF is better, IWFL or SSO?

On 5-year performance, SSO leads with 19.63% vs 17.57% for IWFL. On fees, SSO is cheaper at 0.87% per year. On volatility, SSO has been the lower-risk option at 9.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWFL or SSO?

Over the 5-year period, SSO has performed better with a 19.63% return vs 17.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWFL or SSO?

SSO is cheaper with a 0.87% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.

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

SSO has the higher dividend yield at 0.62%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.

What is the main difference between IWFL and SSO?

IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while SSO tracks S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: UBS and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 0.87% for SSO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SSO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 1.18), 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.