SMHB vs. IWFL
SMHB (ETRACS 2xMonthly Pay Leveraged US Small Cap High Dividend ETN Series B) and IWFL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds from UBS - SMHB tracks the Solactive US Small Cap High Dividend Index (200%) while IWFL tracks the Russell 1000 Growth (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SMHB returned -6.36%/yr vs 19.24%/yr for IWFL. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SMHB charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for IWFL.
Performance
SMHB vs. IWFL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SMHB achieves a 5.72% return, which is significantly lower than IWFL's 10.15% return.
SMHB
- 1D
- -1.45%
- 1M
- -1.99%
- YTD
- 5.72%
- 6M
- 0.84%
- 1Y
- 11.36%
- 3Y*
- 9.31%
- 5Y*
- -6.36%
- 10Y*
- —
IWFL
- 1D
- -2.13%
- 1M
- 10.61%
- YTD
- 10.15%
- 6M
- 8.37%
- 1Y
- 43.59%
- 3Y*
- 38.46%
- 5Y*
- 19.24%
- 10Y*
- —
SMHB vs. IWFL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SMHB ETRACS 2xMonthly Pay Leveraged US Small Cap High Dividend ETN Series B | 5.72% | -7.75% | -15.85% | 35.96% | -36.03% | 38.68% |
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 SMHB and IWFL is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021 | 0.46 |
The correlation between SMHB and IWFL shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (3 years) to 0.47 (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
SMHB vs. IWFL — Risk / Return Rank
SMHB
IWFL
SMHB vs. IWFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2xMonthly Pay Leveraged US Small Cap High Dividend ETN Series B (SMHB) 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.
| SMHB | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.24 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.45 | 1.34 | -0.88 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.10 | 4.25 | -3.16 |
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
| SMHB | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 | 1.37 | -1.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.13 | 0.41 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.10 | 0.41 | -0.52 |
Drawdowns
SMHB vs. IWFL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMHB drawdown since its inception was -90.30%, which is greater than IWFL's maximum drawdown of -59.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMHB and IWFL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMHB | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -90.30% | -59.29% | -31.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.16% | -32.80% | +7.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -45.05% | -46.84% | +1.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -58.85% | -59.29% | +0.44% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -41.81% | -2.91% | -38.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -37.21% | -19.94% | -17.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.38% | 10.28% | +0.10% |
Volatility
SMHB vs. IWFL - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS 2xMonthly Pay Leveraged US Small Cap High Dividend ETN Series B (SMHB) has a higher volatility of 7.35% compared to ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Growth Factor TR ETN (IWFL) at 6.58%. This indicates that SMHB'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
| SMHB | IWFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.35% | 6.58% | +0.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 25.74% | 25.19% | +0.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 38.92% | 32.05% | +6.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 48.93% | 46.69% | +2.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 66.33% | 46.29% | +20.04% |
SMHB vs. IWFL - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMHB has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than IWFL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMHB vs. IWFL - Dividend Comparison
SMHB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.00%, while IWFL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SMHB ETRACS 2xMonthly Pay Leveraged US Small Cap High Dividend ETN Series B | 21.00% | 22.22% | 21.95% | 15.27% | 24.18% | 12.22% | 16.86% | 19.97% | 0.91% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SMHB and IWFL have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SMHB has higher volatility (7.35%) compared to IWFL (6.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMHB dropped -90.30% vs IWFL's -59.29%.
On 5-year performance, IWFL leads with 19.24% vs -6.36% for SMHB. On fees, SMHB is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, IWFL has been the lower-risk option at 6.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IWFL has performed better with a 19.24% return vs -6.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SMHB is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for IWFL.
SMHB has the higher dividend yield at 21.00%, compared with 0.00% for IWFL.
SMHB tracks Solactive US Small Cap High Dividend Index (200%), while IWFL tracks Russell 1000 Growth (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.85% for SMHB and 0.95% for IWFL.
IWFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.29), 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 SMHB 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