QULL vs. IWFL
Compare and contrast key facts about ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL).
QULL and IWFL are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. QULL is a passively managed fund by UBS that tracks the performance of the MSCI USA Sector Neutral Quality Index. It was launched on Feb 5, 2021. IWFL is a passively managed fund by UBS that tracks the performance of the Russell 1000 Growth (200%). It was launched on Feb 5, 2021. Both QULL and IWFL are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: QULL or IWFL.
Key characteristics
| QULL | IWFL | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 48.05% | 60.66% |
| 1Y Return | 68.39% | 83.81% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 10.69% | 10.01% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.69 | 2.16 |
| Sortino Ratio | 3.36 | 2.64 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.45 | 1.38 |
| Calmar Ratio | 3.27 | 2.76 |
| Martin Ratio | 16.65 | 11.72 |
| Ulcer Index | 4.08% | 7.12% |
| Daily Std Dev | 25.24% | 38.58% |
| Max Drawdown | -51.83% | -59.29% |
| Current Drawdown | -2.39% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between QULL and IWFL is 0.92, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
QULL vs. IWFL - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, QULL achieves a 48.05% return, which is significantly lower than IWFL's 60.66% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
QULL vs. IWFL - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both QULL and IWFL have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
QULL vs. IWFL - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL) 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.
Dividends
QULL vs. IWFL - Dividend Comparison
Neither QULL nor IWFL has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
QULL vs. IWFL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QULL drawdown since its inception was -51.83%, smaller than the maximum IWFL drawdown of -59.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QULL and IWFL. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
QULL vs. IWFL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL) is 7.83%, while ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) has a volatility of 14.32%. This indicates that QULL 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.