IWFL vs. VONG
IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and VONG (Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while VONG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFL returned 12.16%/yr vs 11.83%/yr for VONG. Their 0.98 correlation means they have historically moved very closely together. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for VONG.
Performance
IWFL vs. VONG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -3.79% return, which is significantly lower than VONG's 0.39% 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%
VONG
- 1D
- 0.84%
- 1M
- -2.27%
- 6M
- 1.82%
- YTD
- 0.39%
- 1Y
- 10.18%
- 3Y*
- 19.33%
- 5Y*
- 11.83%
- 10Y*
- 17.43%
- ALL TIME*
- 16.45%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $7.49K | $14.18K | $17.14K | |
| $121.41M | $148.04M | $174.70M |
IWFL vs. VONG - 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% |
VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF | 0.39% | 18.45% | 33.20% | 42.67% | -29.18% | 22.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWFL and VONG is 0.94, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.94 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.96 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.97 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021 | 0.98 |
The correlation between IWFL and VONG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. VONG — Risk / Return Rank
IWFL
VONG
IWFL vs. VONG - 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 Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG). 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 | VONG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.09 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.25 | 0.50 | -0.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.73 | 1.48 | -0.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWFL vs. VONG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, which is greater than VONG's maximum drawdown of -32.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and VONG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWFL | VONG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.29% | -32.72% | -26.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.80% | -16.23% | -16.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -46.84% | -23.27% | -23.57% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.29% | -32.72% | -26.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.72% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.19% | -7.89% | -7.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.68% | -4.89% | -14.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.34% | 5.42% | +5.92% |
Volatility
IWFL vs. VONG - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a higher volatility of 13.36% compared to Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) at 6.45%. This indicates that IWFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VONG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWFL | VONG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.36% | 6.45% | +6.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 30.04% | 14.00% | +16.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.73% | 17.45% | +19.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 47.31% | 21.64% | +25.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 46.34% | 21.01% | +25.33% |
IWFL vs. VONG - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than VONG's 0.06% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWFL vs. VONG - Dividend Comparison
IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VONG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.48%.
| 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% |
VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF | 0.48% | 0.45% | 0.55% | 0.71% | 0.98% | 0.58% | 0.77% | 1.03% | 1.18% | 1.19% | 1.48% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.94, IWFL and VONG 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.
IWFL has higher volatility (13.36%) compared to VONG (6.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs VONG's -32.72%.
On 5-year performance, IWFL leads with 12.16% vs 11.83% for VONG. On fees, VONG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, VONG has been the lower-risk option at 6.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IWFL has performed better with a 12.16% return vs 11.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VONG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.
VONG has the higher dividend yield at 0.48%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.
IWFL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while VONG is Large Cap Growth Equities. IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while VONG tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 0.06% for VONG.
VONG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.46 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 VONG
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