UWM vs. IWP

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

UWM (ProShares Ultra Russell2000) and IWP (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UWM is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index (200%), while IWP is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UWM returned 13.66%/yr vs 12.76%/yr for IWP. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. UWM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for IWP.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UWM achieves a 41.43% return, which is significantly higher than IWP's 3.69% return. Over the past 10 years, UWM has outperformed IWP with an annualized return of 13.66%, while IWP has yielded a comparatively lower 12.76% annualized return.

UWM

• 1D: 1.84%
• 1M: 8.96%
• YTD: 41.43%
• 6M: 32.94%
• 1Y: 88.85%
• 3Y*: 28.76%
• 5Y*: 2.87%
• 10Y*: 13.66%

IWP

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 1.79%
• YTD: 3.69%
• 6M: 1.21%
• 1Y: 6.05%
• 3Y*: 15.53%
• 5Y*: 5.46%
• 10Y*: 12.76%

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

UWM vs. IWP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UWM ProShares Ultra Russell2000	41.43%	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	3.69%	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 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	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 0.83 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

UWM vs. IWP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UWM	IWP
Technology	19.1%	22.3%
Industrials	17.8%	25.0%
Healthcare	16.3%	12.8%
Financial Services	15.5%	6.4%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	19.9%
Real Estate	5.9%	1.4%
Energy	5.4%	3.9%
Basic Materials	4.7%	0.4%
Utilities	2.7%	2.5%
Communication Services	2.5%	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	1.9%

Return for Risk

UWM vs. IWP — Risk / Return Rank

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

UWM

UWM Risk / Return Rank: 70
UWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
UWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
UWM Omega Ratio Rank: 56
UWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
UWM Martin Ratio Rank: 75

IWP

IWP Risk / Return Rank: 13
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 12
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

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.

	UWM	IWP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	0.36	+1.93
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.83	0.62	+2.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.07	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.01	0.41	+3.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.68	1.19	+12.49

UWM vs. IWP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UWM Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is higher than the IWP Sharpe Ratio of 0.36. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	UWM	IWP	Difference
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	0.00%	-2.16%	+2.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.81%	-9.67%	-21.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.52%	5.11%	+1.41%

Volatility

UWM vs. IWP - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) has a higher volatility of 12.87% compared to iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) at 5.63%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	UWM	IWP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.87%	5.63%	+7.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.31%	13.32%	+14.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.13%	17.05%	+22.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	45.16%	22.39%	+22.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.18%	21.73%	+24.45%

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 0.73%, more than IWP's 0.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.35%	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	0.73%	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

Can I hold both UWM and IWP in my portfolio?

UWM and IWP have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UWM or IWP?

UWM has higher volatility (12.87%) compared to IWP (5.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UWM dropped -88.21% vs IWP's -56.92%.

Which ETF is better, UWM or IWP?

On 10-year performance, UWM leads with 13.66% vs 12.76% for IWP. On fees, IWP is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, IWP has been the lower-risk option at 5.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UWM or IWP?

Over the 10-year period, UWM has performed better with a 13.66% return vs 12.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UWM or IWP?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UWM or IWP?

UWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.73%, compared with 0.35% for IWP.

What is the main difference between UWM and 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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 0.36), 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.