IWML vs. UGA

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

IWML (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - IWML is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWML returned 4.11%/yr vs 23.72%/yr for UGA. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWML charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for UGA.

Performance

IWML vs. UGA - 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 United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWML achieves a 39.52% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 71.80% return.

IWML

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: 2.12%
• 6M: 25.34%
• YTD: 39.52%
• 1Y: 68.70%
• 3Y*: 23.75%
• 5Y*: 4.11%
• 10Y*: —

UGA

• 1D: -1.13%
• 1M: 0.87%
• 6M: 65.75%
• YTD: 71.80%
• 1Y: 66.14%
• 3Y*: 17.96%
• 5Y*: 23.72%
• 10Y*: 15.78%

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

IWML vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWML ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN	39.52%	9.64%	15.70%	22.31%	-41.80%	2.08%
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	71.80%	-2.00%	3.77%	1.27%	46.34%	44.23%

Correlation

The correlation between IWML and UGA is -0.25, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.25
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.03
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.11

The correlation between IWML and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.25 (1 year) to 0.11 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IWML vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWML

IWML Risk / Return Rank: 63
IWML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
IWML Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
IWML Omega Ratio Rank: 55
IWML Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
IWML Martin Ratio Rank: 68

UGA

UGA Risk / Return Rank: 72
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 68
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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. UGA - 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 United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). 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	UGA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	1.96	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.27	2.50	-0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.32	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.83	3.41	-0.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.89	9.53	+0.35

IWML vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWML Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is comparable to the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWML and UGA, 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. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWML drawdown since its inception was -60.06%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWML and UGA.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWML	UGA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.06%	-86.59%	+26.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.75%	-20.32%	-2.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-51.82%	-26.68%	-25.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-60.06%	-38.11%	-21.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.95%	-14.20%	+12.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.34%	-36.64%	+5.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.52%	7.26%	-0.74%

Volatility

IWML vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Size Factor TR ETN (IWML) has a higher volatility of 13.74% compared to United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) at 10.45%. This indicates that IWML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UGA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWML	UGA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.74%	10.45%	+3.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	30.05%	31.50%	-1.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.20%	35.39%	+4.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.35%	34.57%	+11.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.20%	37.20%	+9.00%

IWML vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWML vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWML nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWML and UGA in my portfolio?

IWML and UGA have a correlation of -0.25, 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 UGA?

IWML has higher volatility (13.74%) compared to UGA (10.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWML dropped -60.06% vs UGA's -86.59%.

Which ETF is better, IWML or UGA?

On 5-year performance, UGA leads with 23.72% vs 4.11% for IWML. On fees, UGA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, UGA has been the lower-risk option at 10.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWML or UGA?

Over the 5-year period, UGA has performed better with a 23.72% return vs 4.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWML or UGA?

UGA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWML.

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

IWML and UGA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between IWML and UGA?

IWML is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. IWML tracks Russell 2000 Index, while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for IWML and 0.75% for UGA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.96 vs 1.60), 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.