MLPB vs. IWFL
MLPB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B) and IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPB is a MLPs fund tracking the Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index, while IWFL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MLPB returned 19.42%/yr vs 19.24%/yr for IWFL. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPB charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for IWFL.
Performance
MLPB vs. IWFL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MLPB achieves a 19.72% return, which is significantly higher than IWFL's 10.15% return.
MLPB
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- -0.42%
- YTD
- 19.72%
- 6M
- 18.24%
- 1Y
- 20.60%
- 3Y*
- 22.21%
- 5Y*
- 19.42%
- 10Y*
- 10.20%
IWFL
- 1D
- -2.13%
- 1M
- 10.61%
- YTD
- 10.15%
- 6M
- 8.37%
- 1Y
- 43.59%
- 3Y*
- 38.46%
- 5Y*
- 19.24%
- 10Y*
- —
MLPB vs. IWFL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MLPB ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B | 19.72% | 7.40% | 25.53% | 22.01% | 30.22% | 27.22% |
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN | 10.15% | 18.54% | 61.94% | 84.47% | -55.71% | 46.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between MLPB and IWFL is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021 | 0.28 |
The correlation between MLPB and IWFL shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (1 year) to 0.29 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
MLPB vs. IWFL — Risk / Return Rank
MLPB
IWFL
MLPB vs. IWFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B (MLPB) 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.
| MLPB | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.24 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.14 | 1.34 | +0.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.60 | 4.25 | +2.34 |
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
| MLPB | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.54 | 1.37 | +0.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.97 | 0.41 | +0.56 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.37 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.24 | 0.41 | -0.18 |
Drawdowns
MLPB vs. IWFL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MLPB drawdown since its inception was -71.93%, which is greater than IWFL's maximum drawdown of -59.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPB and IWFL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MLPB | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -71.93% | -59.29% | -12.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.68% | -32.80% | +23.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.49% | -46.84% | +30.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.41% | -59.29% | +38.88% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -71.93% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.69% | -2.91% | -1.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.83% | -19.94% | +5.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.13% | 10.28% | -7.15% |
Volatility
MLPB vs. IWFL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B (MLPB) is 5.40%, while ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a volatility of 6.58%. This indicates that MLPB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MLPB | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.40% | 6.58% | -1.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.05% | 25.19% | -15.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.51% | 32.05% | -18.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.03% | 46.69% | -26.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.11% | 46.29% | -18.18% |
MLPB vs. IWFL - Expense Ratio Comparison
MLPB has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than IWFL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
MLPB vs. IWFL - Dividend Comparison
MLPB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.85%, while IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth 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% |
MLPB ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B | 5.85% | 6.51% | 5.95% | 6.37% | 6.00% | 6.98% | 11.93% | 7.98% | 8.11% | 7.23% | 6.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MLPB and IWFL have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWFL has higher volatility (6.58%) compared to MLPB (5.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPB dropped -71.93% vs IWFL's -59.29%.
On 5-year performance, MLPB leads with 19.42% vs 19.24% for IWFL. On fees, MLPB is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, MLPB has been the lower-risk option at 5.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MLPB has performed better with a 19.42% return vs 19.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MLPB is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.
MLPB has the higher dividend yield at 5.85%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.
MLPB is categorized as MLPs, while IWFL is Leveraged Equities. MLPB tracks Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index, while IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.85% for MLPB and 0.95% for IWFL.
MLPB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.54 vs 1.37), 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.
Find the right allocation for MLPB 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