IWML vs. FBGX

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN (IWML) and UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN (FBGX).

IWML and FBGX are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IWML is a passively managed fund by UBS that tracks the performance of the Russell 2000 Index. It was launched on Feb 4, 2021. FBGX is a passively managed fund by UBS that tracks the performance of the Russell 1000 Growth Index (200%). It was launched on Jun 11, 2014. Both IWML and FBGX are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

IWML vs. FBGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN (IWML) and UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN (FBGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

IWML vs. FBGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWML ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN	0.97%	9.64%	15.70%	22.31%	-41.80%	2.08%
FBGX UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN	0.00%	0.00%	35.73%	83.74%	-56.41%	44.91%

Returns By Period

IWML

• 1D: 1.93%
• 1M: -10.49%
• YTD: 0.97%
• 6M: 3.02%
• 1Y: 37.84%
• 3Y*: 15.02%
• 5Y*: -1.97%
• 10Y*: —

FBGX

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IWML vs. FBGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than FBGX's 1.29% expense ratio.

FBGX

UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN

IWML

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN

Return for Risk

IWML vs. FBGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWML

IWML Risk / Return Rank: 43
IWML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
IWML Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
IWML Omega Ratio Rank: 44
IWML Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
IWML Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

IWML vs. FBGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN (IWML) and UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN (FBGX). 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.

	IWML	FBGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.77	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.35	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.26	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.52	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWML	FBGX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.77	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.04	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.03	—	—

Correlation

The correlation between IWML and FBGX is 0.55, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

IWML vs. FBGX - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWML nor FBGX has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	IWML	FBGX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.86%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-60.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.20%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.77%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.58%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IWML	FBGX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.29%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	30.01%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	49.43%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.20%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.53%	—	—