LQQ.PA vs. IWFL
LQQ.PA (Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage) and IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - LQQ.PA is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Nasdaq 100® Leverage (2x) index, while IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LQQ.PA returned 42.81%/yr vs 31.76%/yr for IWFL. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LQQ.PA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for IWFL.
Performance
LQQ.PA vs. IWFL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
LQQ.PA is traded in EUR, while IWFL is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IWFL values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQQ.PA achieves a 40.35% return, which is significantly higher than IWFL's 7.59% return.
LQQ.PA
- 1D
- 5.42%
- 1M
- 8.04%
- YTD
- 40.35%
- 6M
- 42.90%
- 1Y
- 81.16%
- 3Y*
- 42.81%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWFL
- 1D
- 3.92%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 7.59%
- 6M
- 9.43%
- 1Y
- 38.04%
- 3Y*
- 31.76%
- 5Y*
- 18.36%
- 10Y*
- —
LQQ.PA vs. IWFL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
LQQ.PA Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage | 40.35% | 14.16% | 57.00% | 75.85% |
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN | 7.59% | 4.47% | 72.63% | 58.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQQ.PA and IWFL is 0.68, 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 | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 10, 2023 | 0.62 |
The correlation between LQQ.PA and IWFL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
LQQ.PA vs. IWFL — Risk / Return Rank
LQQ.PA
IWFL
LQQ.PA vs. IWFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage (LQQ.PA) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL). 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.
| LQQ.PA | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.21 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.65 | 1.20 | +2.46 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.21 | 3.56 | +7.65 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LQQ.PA vs. IWFL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQQ.PA drawdown since its inception was -44.66%, smaller than the maximum IWFL drawdown of -55.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQQ.PA and IWFL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQQ.PA | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.66% | -55.75% | +11.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.88% | -31.97% | +10.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -44.66% | -49.20% | +4.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -55.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.10% | -6.07% | +4.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.19% | -19.11% | +11.92% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.17% | 10.72% | -3.55% |
Volatility
LQQ.PA vs. IWFL - Volatility Comparison
Lyxor UCITS NASDAQ-100 Daily Leverage (LQQ.PA) has a higher volatility of 12.35% compared to ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) at 9.21%. This indicates that LQQ.PA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQQ.PA | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.35% | 9.21% | +3.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.49% | 25.54% | -1.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.04% | 32.52% | -0.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.49% | 45.99% | -10.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.49% | 45.41% | -9.92% |
LQQ.PA vs. IWFL - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQQ.PA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than IWFL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
LQQ.PA vs. IWFL - Dividend Comparison
Neither LQQ.PA nor IWFL has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
LQQ.PA and IWFL have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LQQ.PA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LQQ.PA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.
LQQ.PA is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while IWFL is Leveraged Equities. LQQ.PA tracks Nasdaq 100® Leverage (2x) index, while IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%). They also come from different issuers: Amundi and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for LQQ.PA and 0.95% for IWFL.
Find the right allocation for LQQ.PA and IWFL
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