IWML vs. SPYG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWML (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN) and SPYG (State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWML is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while SPYG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWML returned 3.12%/yr vs 14.11%/yr for SPYG. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWML charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SPYG.

Performance

IWML vs. SPYG - 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 State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF (SPYG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWML achieves a 39.21% return, which is significantly higher than SPYG's 8.70% return.

IWML

• 1D: 3.76%
• 1M: 6.64%
• YTD: 39.21%
• 6M: 32.71%
• 1Y: 83.07%
• 3Y*: 27.63%
• 5Y*: 3.12%
• 10Y*: —

SPYG

• 1D: -2.40%
• 1M: -2.07%
• YTD: 8.70%
• 6M: 7.46%
• 1Y: 26.87%
• 3Y*: 25.48%
• 5Y*: 14.11%
• 10Y*: 18.05%

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

IWML vs. SPYG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWML ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN	39.21%	9.64%	15.70%	22.31%	-41.80%	2.08%
SPYG State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF	8.70%	22.09%	35.99%	30.02%	-29.41%	26.94%

Correlation

The correlation between IWML and SPYG is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.68

The correlation between IWML and SPYG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IWML vs. SPYG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWML

IWML Risk / Return Rank: 69
IWML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
IWML Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
IWML Omega Ratio Rank: 59
IWML Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
IWML Martin Ratio Rank: 74

SPYG

SPYG Risk / Return Rank: 45
SPYG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
SPYG Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
SPYG Omega Ratio Rank: 44
SPYG Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
SPYG Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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. SPYG - 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 State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF (SPYG). 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.

	IWML	SPYG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.13	1.57	+0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	2.17	+0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.28	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.67	1.96	+1.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.81	7.79	+5.02

IWML vs. SPYG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWML Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is higher than the SPYG Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWML and SPYG, 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

IWML vs. SPYG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWML drawdown since its inception was -60.06%, smaller than the maximum SPYG drawdown of -67.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWML and SPYG.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWML	SPYG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.06%	-67.63%	+7.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.75%	-13.76%	-8.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-51.82%	-22.14%	-29.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-60.06%	-32.67%	-27.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-32.67%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-5.52%	+5.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.60%	-24.28%	-7.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.51%	3.46%	+3.05%

Volatility

IWML vs. SPYG - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN (IWML) has a higher volatility of 11.41% compared to State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF (SPYG) at 7.26%. This indicates that IWML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SPYG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWML	SPYG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.41%	7.26%	+4.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.43%	13.90%	+14.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.15%	17.26%	+21.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.19%	21.36%	+24.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.14%	20.73%	+25.41%

IWML vs. SPYG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SPYG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWML vs. SPYG - Dividend Comparison

IWML has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SPYG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.50%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWML ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size 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%
SPYG State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF	0.50%	0.52%	0.60%	1.15%	1.03%	0.62%	0.90%	1.37%	1.51%	1.41%	1.55%	1.57%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWML and SPYG in my portfolio?

IWML and SPYG have a correlation of 0.60, 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 SPYG?

IWML has higher volatility (11.41%) compared to SPYG (7.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWML dropped -60.06% vs SPYG's -67.63%.

Which ETF is better, IWML or SPYG?

On 5-year performance, SPYG leads with 14.11% vs 3.12% for IWML. On fees, SPYG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SPYG has been the lower-risk option at 7.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWML or SPYG?

Over the 5-year period, SPYG has performed better with a 14.11% return vs 3.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWML or SPYG?

SPYG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWML.

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

SPYG has the higher dividend yield at 0.50%, compared with 0.00% for IWML.

What is the main difference between IWML and SPYG?

IWML is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while SPYG is S&P 500. IWML tracks Russell 2000 Index, while SPYG tracks S&P 500 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWML and 0.04% for SPYG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 1.57), 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.