Data as of .
BMNU vs BMNZ: which held to its multiple?
Over three months against its own daily promise, BMNU finished 14.0 points short and BMNZ 1.2 points short.
ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score: BMNZ scores higher
Did it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?
A percentile among the 391 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All leveraged ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMNU | BMNZ | BMNU | BMNZ | BMNU | BMNZ | |
| 1 month | +80.6% | −59.8% | +79.8% | −79.8% | +0.7 pts | +20.0 pts |
| 3 months | +93.1% | −76.8% | +110.7% | −110.7% | −17.7 pts | +34.0 pts |
| 6 months | −3.7% | −75.5% | +43.7% | −43.7% | −47.4 pts | −31.8 pts |
| Since launch | −92.5% | −78.1% | −100.8% | +63.1% | +8.4 pts | −141.2 pts |
| BMNU T-REX 2X LONG BMNR DAILY TARGET ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of BMNR | BMNZ Defiance Daily Target 2X Short BMNR ETF Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of BMNR | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | T-REX | Defiance |
| Sets out to return | +2x | -2x |
| On | BMNR | BMNR |
| Segment | company | company |
| Fund returned, 3 months | +93.1% | −76.8% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | +55.4% | +55.4% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | +110.7% | −110.7% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | −17.7 pts | +34.0 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | −92.5% | −78.1% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | +8.4 pts | −141.2 pts |
| Underlying volatility | 81% | 81% |
| Difference over the days both have traded | +0.7 pts | no shared window |
| Expense ratio | 1.50% | 1.40% |
| Launched | Sep 26, 2025 | Nov 13, 2025 |
BMNU in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: BMNU returned +93.1% where its own daily promise gave +107.0%, 14.0 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times BMNR's 55.4% implies +110.7%, which makes BMNU look 17.7 points short. 3.7 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. BMNU aims to return +2 times BMNR's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +2 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more. BMNR moved at 81% annualized over that window. That is what decides how far the two figures separate: the same fund on a calm underlying and a violent one is a different product.
BMNZ in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: BMNZ returned −76.8% where its own daily promise gave −75.5%, 1.2 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times BMNR's 55.4% implies −110.7%, which makes BMNZ look 34.0 points over. 35.2 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. BMNZ aims to return -2 times BMNR's move each day, then resets. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not -2 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more.
Questions people ask
- Which came closer to its stated multiple, BMNU or BMNZ?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, BMNU finished 17.7 points from what its multiple implies and BMNZ finished 34.0 points from its own, so BMNU came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are BMNU and BMNZ levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on BMNR, BMNU at +2 times and BMNZ at -2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, BMNU or BMNZ?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window BMNU’s moved at 81% annualized and BMNZ’s at 81%, so BMNU has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold BMNU or BMNZ for a year?
- Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.
- Which is cheaper, BMNU or BMNZ?
- BMNU charges 1.50% a year and BMNZ charges 1.40%, so BMNZ is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, BMNU against BMNZ, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/BMNU-BMNZ Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.