IWML vs. TERG
IWML (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN) and TERG (Leverage Shares 2X Long TER Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. IWML is passively managed, while TERG is actively managed. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWML charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for TERG.
Performance
IWML vs. TERG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWML achieves a 32.65% return, which is significantly lower than TERG's 229.64% return.
IWML
- 1D
- -2.04%
- 1M
- 6.57%
- YTD
- 32.65%
- 6M
- 29.46%
- 1Y
- 78.21%
- 3Y*
- 25.01%
- 5Y*
- 2.91%
- 10Y*
- —
TERG
- 1D
- 8.49%
- 1M
- 39.95%
- YTD
- 229.64%
- 6M
- 218.92%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWML vs. TERG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IWML ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN | 32.65% | 12.75% |
TERG Leverage Shares 2X Long TER Daily ETF | 229.64% | 28.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWML and TERG is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2025 | 0.61 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
IWML vs. TERG — Risk / Return Rank
IWML
TERG
IWML vs. TERG - 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 Leverage Shares 2X Long TER Daily ETF (TERG). 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 | TERG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.46 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.11 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IWML | TERG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.05 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.08 | 9.90 | -9.81 |
Drawdowns
IWML vs. TERG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWML drawdown since its inception was -60.06%, which is greater than TERG's maximum drawdown of -49.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWML and TERG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWML | TERG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -60.06% | -49.52% | -10.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.75% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -51.82% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -60.06% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.67% | -15.98% | +13.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.91% | -13.73% | -18.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.48% | — | — |
Volatility
IWML vs. TERG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWML | TERG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.79% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 27.49% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 38.36% | 139.25% | -100.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 46.08% | 139.25% | -93.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 46.17% | 139.25% | -93.08% |
IWML vs. TERG - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than TERG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWML vs. TERG - Dividend Comparison
Neither IWML nor TERG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
IWML and TERG have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, TERG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
TERG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWML.
IWML and TERG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: UBS and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWML and 0.75% for TERG.
Find the right allocation for IWML and TERG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer