IWFL vs. UGA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFL returned 14.74%/yr vs 22.69%/yr for UGA. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for UGA.

Performance

IWFL vs. UGA - 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 United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). 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 lower than UGA's 64.09% return.

IWFL

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

UGA

• 1D: -1.12%
• 1M: -12.11%
• YTD: 64.09%
• 6M: 60.42%
• 1Y: 59.74%
• 3Y*: 18.95%
• 5Y*: 22.69%
• 10Y*: 14.31%

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

IWFL vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	-0.55%	18.54%	61.94%	84.47%	-55.71%	46.03%
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	64.09%	-2.00%	3.77%	1.27%	46.34%	44.23%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFL and UGA is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.19
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.05
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.04

The correlation between IWFL and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to 0.04 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IWFL vs. UGA — 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

UGA

UGA Risk / Return Rank: 55
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 49
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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. UGA - 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 United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). 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	UGA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.84	1.73	-0.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.27	2.25	-0.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.30	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.85	3.17	-2.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.65	9.39	-6.74

IWFL vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFL Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is lower than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFL and UGA, 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. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and UGA.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFL	UGA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.29%	-86.59%	+27.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.80%	-18.96%	-13.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-46.84%	-26.68%	-20.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.29%	-38.11%	-21.18%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.34%	-18.05%	+5.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.82%	-36.69%	+16.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.49%	6.43%	+4.06%

Volatility

IWFL vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a higher volatility of 10.92% compared to United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) at 9.24%. This indicates that IWFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UGA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWFL	UGA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.92%	9.24%	+1.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.51%	30.57%	-4.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.32%	35.22%	-1.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.86%	34.45%	+12.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.25%	37.22%	+9.03%

IWFL vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFL vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWFL nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFL and UGA in my portfolio?

IWFL and UGA have a correlation of -0.19, 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 UGA?

IWFL has higher volatility (10.92%) compared to UGA (9.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs UGA's -86.59%.

Which ETF is better, IWFL or UGA?

On 5-year performance, UGA leads with 22.69% vs 14.74% for IWFL. On fees, UGA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, UGA has been the lower-risk option at 9.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWFL or UGA?

Over the 5-year period, UGA has performed better with a 22.69% return vs 14.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWFL or UGA?

UGA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.

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

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

What is the main difference between IWFL and UGA?

IWFL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 0.75% for UGA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 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.