PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWFL vs. WTIU
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

IWFL vs. WTIU - 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 MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

IWFL vs. WTIU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
IWFL
ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN
-19.22%18.54%61.94%48.58%
WTIU
MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN
113.23%-17.13%-29.63%-28.42%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFL achieves a -19.22% return, which is significantly lower than WTIU's 113.23% return.


IWFL

1D
2.15%
1M
-7.96%
YTD
-19.22%
6M
-19.55%
1Y
20.29%
3Y*
30.77%
5Y*
13.77%
10Y*

WTIU

1D
-11.84%
1M
17.12%
YTD
113.23%
6M
89.84%
1Y
46.84%
3Y*
2.42%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


IWFL vs. WTIU - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IWFL and WTIU have an expense ratio of 0.95%.


Return for Risk

IWFL vs. WTIU — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFL
IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank

WTIU
WTIU Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
WTIU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WTIU Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
WTIU Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
WTIU Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
WTIU Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank
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. WTIU - 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 MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU). 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.


IWFLWTIUDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.37

0.58

-0.21

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.95

1.22

-0.27

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.18

-0.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.67

0.92

-0.25

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

2.10

1.71

+0.40

IWFL vs. WTIU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFL Sharpe Ratio is 0.37, which is lower than the WTIU Sharpe Ratio of 0.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFL and WTIU, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IWFLWTIUDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.37

0.58

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

-0.05

+0.33

Correlation

The correlation between IWFL and WTIU is 0.08, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

IWFL vs. WTIU - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWFL nor WTIU has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

IWFL vs. WTIU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFL drawdown since its inception was -59.29%, smaller than the maximum WTIU drawdown of -75.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFL and WTIU.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFLWTIUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.29%

-75.73%

+16.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-32.80%

-53.11%

+20.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-59.29%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-25.44%

-24.42%

-1.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.34%

-39.49%

+19.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.42%

28.53%

-18.11%

Volatility

IWFL vs. WTIU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) is 15.30%, while MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU) has a volatility of 22.50%. This indicates that IWFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WTIU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


IWFLWTIUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.30%

22.50%

-7.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

27.03%

46.56%

-19.53%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

55.74%

81.69%

-25.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

46.76%

69.54%

-22.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

46.77%

69.54%

-22.77%