IWML vs. MULL

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWML (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN) and MULL (GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. IWML is passively managed, while MULL is actively managed. Over the past year, IWML returned 83.01% vs 5016.23% for MULL. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWML charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for MULL.

Performance

IWML vs. MULL - 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 GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWML achieves a 36.05% return, which is significantly lower than MULL's 774.91% return.

IWML

• 1D: 2.56%
• 1M: 5.76%
• YTD: 36.05%
• 6M: 34.20%
• 1Y: 83.01%
• 3Y*: 27.16%
• 5Y*: 3.43%
• 10Y*: —

MULL

• 1D: -15.62%
• 1M: 119.20%
• YTD: 774.91%
• 6M: 1,229.17%
• 1Y: 5,016.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IWML vs. MULL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IWML ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN	36.05%	9.64%	-12.93%
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	774.91%	558.51%	-40.10%

Correlation

The correlation between IWML and MULL is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2024	0.47

Return for Risk

IWML vs. MULL — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWML

IWML Risk / Return Rank: 66
IWML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
IWML Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
IWML Omega Ratio Rank: 56
IWML Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
IWML Martin Ratio Rank: 70

MULL

MULL Risk / Return Rank: 99
MULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
MULL Omega Ratio Rank: 96
MULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. MULL - 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 GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL). 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	MULL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.18	38.21	-36.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.83	6.62	-3.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.83	-0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.67	96.00	-92.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.85	321.55	-308.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWML vs. MULL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWML Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is lower than the MULL Sharpe Ratio of 38.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWML and MULL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWML	MULL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.18	38.21	-36.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.07	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.09	6.53	-6.43

Drawdowns

IWML vs. MULL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWML drawdown since its inception was -60.06%, smaller than the maximum MULL drawdown of -72.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWML and MULL.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWML	MULL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.06%	-72.29%	+12.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.75%	-53.09%	+30.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-51.82%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-60.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.17%	-15.62%	+15.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.88%	-20.61%	-11.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.48%	15.82%	-9.34%

Volatility

IWML vs. MULL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN (IWML) is 9.58%, while GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) has a volatility of 57.59%. This indicates that IWML experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MULL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWML	MULL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.58%	57.59%	-48.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.58%	107.25%	-79.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	38.33%	133.41%	-95.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.10%	136.72%	-90.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.17%	136.72%	-90.55%

IWML vs. MULL - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than MULL's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWML vs. MULL - Dividend Comparison

IWML has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MULL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%.

Position	TTM	2025
IWML ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN	0.00%	0.00%
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	0.04%	0.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWML and MULL in my portfolio?

IWML and MULL have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWML or MULL?

MULL has higher volatility (57.59%) compared to IWML (9.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWML dropped -60.06% vs MULL's -72.29%.

Which ETF is better, IWML or MULL?

On 1-year performance, MULL leads with 5016.23% vs 83.01% for IWML. On fees, IWML is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, IWML has been the lower-risk option at 9.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWML or MULL?

Over the 1-year period, MULL has performed better with a 5016.23% return vs 83.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWML or MULL?

IWML is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MULL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWML or MULL?

MULL has the higher dividend yield at 0.04%, compared with 0.00% for IWML.

What is the main difference between IWML and MULL?

They also come from different issuers: UBS and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWML and 1.50% for MULL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (38.21 vs 2.18), 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.