IWFL vs. WNTR

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) and WNTR (YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%), while WNTR is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax. IWFL is passively managed, while WNTR is actively managed. Over the past year, IWFL returned 20.72% vs 120.64% for WNTR. At a correlation of -0.48, they often move in opposite directions. IWFL charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.01%/yr for WNTR.

Performance

IWFL vs. WNTR - 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 YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a 1.62% return, which is significantly lower than WNTR's 10.13% return.

IWFL

• 1D: -3.80%
• 1M: -0.34%
• 6M: 0.05%
• YTD: 1.62%
• 1Y: 20.72%
• 3Y*: 30.04%
• 5Y*: 13.72%
• 10Y*: —

WNTR

• 1D: 1.92%
• 1M: 18.08%
• 6M: 14.43%
• YTD: 10.13%
• 1Y: 120.64%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IWFL vs. WNTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	1.62%	41.16%
WNTR YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF	10.13%	52.78%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFL and WNTR is -0.45, 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	-0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025	-0.48

Return for Risk

IWFL vs. WNTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFL

IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 21
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 22
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 21

WNTR

WNTR Risk / Return Rank: 70
WNTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
WNTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
WNTR Omega Ratio Rank: 72
WNTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
WNTR Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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. WNTR - 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 YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR). 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	WNTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.59	2.26	-1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.02	2.47	-1.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.34	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.63	2.84	-2.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.92	7.31	-5.39

IWFL vs. WNTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFL Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is lower than the WNTR Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFL and WNTR, 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. WNTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, which is greater than WNTR's maximum drawdown of -42.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and WNTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFL	WNTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.29%	-42.65%	-16.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.80%	-42.65%	+9.85%
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	-10.42%	-10.15%	-0.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.74%	-20.53%	+0.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.81%	16.58%	-5.77%

Volatility

IWFL vs. WNTR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) is 14.41%, while YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR) has a volatility of 18.84%. This indicates that IWFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WNTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWFL	WNTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.41%	18.84%	-4.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.79%	47.46%	-18.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.17%	53.83%	-18.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.15%	53.56%	-6.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.33%	53.56%	-7.23%

IWFL vs. WNTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than WNTR's 1.01% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFL vs. WNTR - Dividend Comparison

IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while WNTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 102.14%.

Position	TTM	2025
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	0.00%	0.00%
WNTR YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF	102.14%	58.56%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFL and WNTR in my portfolio?

IWFL and WNTR have a correlation of -0.45, 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 WNTR?

WNTR has higher volatility (18.84%) compared to IWFL (14.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFL dropped -59.29% vs WNTR's -42.65%.

Which ETF is better, IWFL or WNTR?

On 1-year performance, WNTR leads with 120.64% vs 20.72% for IWFL. On fees, IWFL is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, IWFL has been the lower-risk option at 14.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWFL or WNTR?

Over the 1-year period, WNTR has performed better with a 120.64% return vs 20.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWFL or WNTR?

IWFL is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for WNTR.

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

WNTR has the higher dividend yield at 102.14%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.

What is the main difference between IWFL and WNTR?

IWFL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while WNTR is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: UBS and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWFL and 1.01% for WNTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WNTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 0.59), 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.