ROM vs. IWFL

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

ROM (ProShares Ultra Technology) and IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - ROM tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Technology Index (200%) while IWFL tracks the Russell 1000 Growth (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ROM returned 29.24%/yr vs 17.57%/yr for IWFL. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

ROM vs. IWFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Technology (ROM) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ROM achieves a 67.66% return, which is significantly higher than IWFL's 6.19% return.

ROM

• 1D: 7.62%
• 1M: 16.55%
• YTD: 67.66%
• 6M: 71.14%
• 1Y: 133.22%
• 3Y*: 52.64%
• 5Y*: 29.24%
• 10Y*: 42.53%

IWFL

• 1D: 4.15%
• 1M: 0.06%
• YTD: 6.19%
• 6M: 7.94%
• 1Y: 38.55%
• 3Y*: 34.35%
• 5Y*: 17.57%
• 10Y*: —

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

ROM vs. IWFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ROM ProShares Ultra Technology	67.66%	35.63%	31.65%	130.70%	-63.86%	58.01%
IWFL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN	6.19%	18.54%	61.94%	84.47%	-55.71%	46.03%

Correlation

The correlation between ROM and IWFL is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.94

The correlation between ROM and IWFL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ROM vs. IWFL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ROM

ROM Risk / Return Rank: 80
ROM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
ROM Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
ROM Omega Ratio Rank: 78
ROM Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
ROM Martin Ratio Rank: 72

IWFL

IWFL Risk / Return Rank: 31
IWFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
IWFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
IWFL Omega Ratio Rank: 34
IWFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
IWFL Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

ROM vs. IWFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Technology (ROM) 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.

	ROM	IWFL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.93	1.18	+1.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	1.64	+1.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.21	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.15	1.18	+2.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.28	3.72	+8.57

ROM vs. IWFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ROM Sharpe Ratio is 2.93, which is higher than the IWFL Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ROM and IWFL, 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

ROM vs. IWFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ROM drawdown since its inception was -83.36%, which is greater than IWFL's maximum drawdown of -59.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ROM and IWFL.

Drawdown Indicators

	ROM	IWFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.36%	-59.29%	-24.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.33%	-32.80%	+0.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.10%	-46.84%	-1.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-67.55%	-59.29%	-8.26%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-67.55%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.56%	-6.39%	-1.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.86%	-19.86%	-1.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.89%	10.40%	+0.49%

Volatility

ROM vs. IWFL - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Technology (ROM) has a higher volatility of 23.16% compared to ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) at 10.15%. This indicates that ROM'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.

Volatility by Period

	ROM	IWFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	23.16%	10.15%	+13.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.71%	26.55%	+12.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	45.83%	33.01%	+12.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	52.28%	46.80%	+5.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	50.18%	46.27%	+3.91%

ROM vs. IWFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ROM and IWFL have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

ROM vs. IWFL - Dividend Comparison

ROM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, while IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%
ROM ProShares Ultra Technology	0.15%	0.24%	0.21%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.05%	0.16%	0.30%	0.08%	0.20%	0.12%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ROM and IWFL in my portfolio?

ROM and IWFL have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ROM or IWFL?

ROM has higher volatility (23.16%) compared to IWFL (10.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ROM dropped -83.36% vs IWFL's -59.29%.

Which ETF is better, ROM or IWFL?

On 5-year performance, ROM leads with 29.24% vs 17.57% for IWFL. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, IWFL has been the lower-risk option at 10.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ROM or IWFL?

Over the 5-year period, ROM has performed better with a 29.24% return vs 17.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ROM or IWFL?

ROM and IWFL have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ROM or IWFL?

ROM has the higher dividend yield at 0.15%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.

What is the main difference between ROM and IWFL?

ROM tracks Dow Jones U.S. Technology Index (200%), while IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and UBS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ROM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.93 vs 1.18), 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.