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

Performance

UWM vs. IWR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR). 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 31.87% return, which is significantly higher than IWR's 12.43% return. Over the past 10 years, UWM has outperformed IWR with an annualized return of 12.16%, while IWR has yielded a comparatively lower 11.55% annualized return.


UWM

1D
-2.69%
1M
6.41%
YTD
31.87%
6M
28.56%
1Y
76.77%
3Y*
25.03%
5Y*
1.71%
10Y*
12.16%

IWR

1D
-0.26%
1M
3.79%
YTD
12.43%
6M
12.21%
1Y
21.66%
3Y*
17.25%
5Y*
8.00%
10Y*
11.55%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UWM vs. IWR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
31.87%13.59%11.32%22.62%-43.69%23.91%16.57%48.62%-25.89%26.92%
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF
12.43%10.37%15.21%17.05%-17.48%22.44%16.93%30.23%-9.10%18.25%

Correlation

The correlation between UWM and IWR is 0.91, 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

0.91

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.92

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.93

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2007

0.93

The correlation between UWM and IWR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

UWM vs. IWR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
UWM
IWR

Industrials

17.7%
18.4%

Technology

17.0%
17.2%

Healthcare

16.5%
8.7%

Financial Services

15.8%
12.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
11.2%

Real Estate

6.1%
7.0%

Energy

6.1%
7.2%

Basic Materials

4.8%
4.3%

Utilities

2.9%
6.1%

Communication Services

2.4%
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
4.1%

Industrials

UWM
17.7%
IWR
18.4%

Technology

UWM
17.0%
IWR
17.2%

Healthcare

UWM
16.5%
IWR
8.7%

Financial Services

UWM
15.8%
IWR
12.5%

Consumer Cyclical

UWM
8.4%
IWR
11.2%

Real Estate

UWM
6.1%
IWR
7.0%

Energy

UWM
6.1%
IWR
7.2%

Basic Materials

UWM
4.8%
IWR
4.3%

Utilities

UWM
2.9%
IWR
6.1%

Communication Services

UWM
2.4%
IWR
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

UWM
2.4%
IWR
4.1%

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. IWR — Risk / Return Rank

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

UWM
UWM Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
UWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
UWM Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
UWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
UWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

IWR
IWR Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
IWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWR Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
IWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWR Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
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. IWR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR). 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.


UWMIWRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.41

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.28

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.46

2.66

+0.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.85

10.28

+1.57

UWM vs. IWR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UWM Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is comparable to the IWR Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UWM and IWR, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


UWMIWRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.03

1.63

+0.41

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

0.44

-0.40

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.26

0.60

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.14

0.49

-0.35

Drawdowns

UWM vs. IWR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UWM drawdown since its inception was -88.21%, which is greater than IWR's maximum drawdown of -58.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UWM and IWR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UWMIWRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-88.21%

-58.78%

-29.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.28%

-8.17%

-14.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-49.79%

-21.09%

-28.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.62%

-26.18%

-35.44%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.46%

-40.59%

-30.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.55%

-0.26%

-3.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.88%

-7.80%

-23.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.50%

2.11%

+4.39%

Volatility

UWM vs. IWR - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) has a higher volatility of 11.45% compared to iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) at 3.26%. This indicates that UWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UWMIWRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.45%

3.26%

+8.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.82%

9.84%

+16.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

38.04%

13.39%

+24.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

45.01%

18.23%

+26.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

46.08%

19.36%

+26.72%

UWM vs. IWR - Expense Ratio Comparison

UWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IWR's 0.19% expense ratio.


Dividends

UWM vs. IWR - Dividend Comparison

UWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%, less than IWR's 1.15% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF
1.15%1.29%1.27%1.43%1.59%1.04%1.28%1.43%1.98%1.52%1.72%1.59%
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
0.78%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


With a correlation of 0.91, UWM and IWR move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

UWM has higher volatility (11.45%) compared to IWR (3.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UWM dropped -88.21% vs IWR's -58.78%.

On 10-year performance, UWM leads with 12.16% vs 11.55% for IWR. On fees, IWR is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWR has been the lower-risk option at 3.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, UWM has performed better with a 12.16% return vs 11.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWR is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UWM.

IWR has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.78% for UWM.

UWM is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while IWR is Mid Cap Growth Equities. UWM tracks Russell 2000 Index (200%), while IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for UWM and 0.19% for IWR.

UWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.63), 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 IWR

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