PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
UWM vs. IWP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

UWM vs. IWP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UWM achieves a 34.04% return, which is significantly higher than IWP's 0.23% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with UWM having a 11.65% annualized return and IWP not far ahead at 11.67%.


UWM

1D
-0.88%
1M
-4.73%
6M
21.37%
YTD
34.04%
1Y
71.18%
3Y*
19.23%
5Y*
3.29%
10Y*
11.65%
ALL TIME*
7.15%

IWP

1D
-0.32%
1M
-4.14%
6M
1.18%
YTD
0.23%
1Y
-1.18%
3Y*
11.93%
5Y*
4.22%
10Y*
11.67%
ALL TIME*
9.10%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$113.97M$109.26M$114.31M
$17.68M$17.26M$19.83M

UWM vs. IWP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
34.04%13.59%11.32%22.62%-43.69%23.91%16.57%48.62%-25.89%26.92%
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.23%8.45%21.86%25.70%-26.90%12.60%35.25%35.04%-4.89%24.93%

Correlation

The correlation between UWM and IWP is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.87

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2007

0.88

The correlation between UWM and IWP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

UWM vs. IWP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
UWM
IWP

Financial Services

41.4%
4.3%

Healthcare

11.1%
13.9%

Technology

7.8%
31.6%

Industrials

7.6%
20.4%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
13.4%

Real Estate

4.0%
2.5%

Energy

3.4%
4.5%

Basic Materials

2.6%
2.4%

Utilities

1.8%
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

1.6%
1.3%

Communication Services

0.9%
3.2%

Financial Services

UWM
41.4%
IWP
4.3%

Healthcare

UWM
11.1%
IWP
13.9%

Technology

UWM
7.8%
IWP
31.6%

Industrials

UWM
7.6%
IWP
20.4%

Consumer Cyclical

UWM
5.1%
IWP
13.4%

Real Estate

UWM
4.0%
IWP
2.5%

Energy

UWM
3.4%
IWP
4.5%

Basic Materials

UWM
2.6%
IWP
2.4%

Utilities

UWM
1.8%
IWP
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

UWM
1.6%
IWP
1.3%

Communication Services

UWM
0.9%
IWP
3.2%

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

UWM vs. IWP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

UWM
UWM Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
UWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
UWM Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
UWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
UWM Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

IWP
IWP Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

UWM vs. IWP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). 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.


UWMIWPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.84

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.40

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

0.99

+0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.90

-0.19

+3.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.90

-0.52

+10.42

UWM vs. IWP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is higher than the IWP Sharpe Ratio of -0.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UWM and IWP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

UWM vs. IWP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UWM drawdown since its inception was -88.21%, which is greater than IWP's maximum drawdown of -56.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UWM and IWP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UWMIWPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-88.21%

-56.92%

-31.29%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.28%

-14.79%

-7.49%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-49.79%

-25.20%

-24.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.62%

-38.62%

-23.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.46%

-38.62%

-32.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.49%

-6.40%

-0.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.65%

-9.64%

-21.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.51%

5.31%

+1.20%

Volatility

UWM vs. IWP - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) has a higher volatility of 7.49% compared to iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) at 5.14%. This indicates that UWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UWMIWPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.49%

5.14%

+2.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

27.96%

13.94%

+14.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

38.46%

17.56%

+20.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

44.91%

22.47%

+22.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

46.02%

21.71%

+24.31%

UWM vs. IWP - Expense Ratio Comparison

UWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IWP's 0.23% expense ratio.


Dividends

UWM vs. IWP - Dividend Comparison

UWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.84%, more than IWP's 0.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.36%0.37%0.40%0.54%0.77%0.30%0.38%0.59%1.02%0.78%1.16%0.98%
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
0.84%1.05%1.16%0.34%0.40%0.00%0.07%0.55%0.41%0.11%0.27%0.23%

Frequently Asked Questions


UWM and IWP have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UWM has higher volatility (7.49%) compared to IWP (5.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UWM dropped -88.21% vs IWP's -56.92%.

On 10-year performance, IWP leads with 11.67% vs 11.65% for UWM. On fees, IWP is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, IWP has been the lower-risk option at 5.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWP has performed better with a 11.67% return vs 11.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWP is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UWM.

UWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.84%, compared with 0.36% for IWP.

UWM is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while IWP is Mid Cap Growth Equities. UWM tracks Russell 2000 Index (200%), while IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for UWM and 0.23% for IWP.

UWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.68 vs -0.16), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UWM and IWP

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