Data as of .
CRD vs CRDU: which held to its multiple?
Over the days both have traded, CRD finished 10.9 points from its stated multiple and CRDU 11.0.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CRD | CRDU | CRD | CRDU | CRD | CRDU | |
| 1 month | −67.5% | −67.4% | −78.5% | −78.5% | +10.9 pts | +11.0 pts |
| 3 months | not published | −69.8% | not published | −70.1% | not published | +0.3 pts |
| 6 months | not published | +5.4% | not published | +76.9% | not published | −71.5 pts |
| Since launch | −62.3% | −65.3% | −62.0% | −1.8% | −0.3 pts | −63.5 pts |
| CRD Corgi CRDO 2x Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of CRDO | CRDU Tradr 2X Long CRDO Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of CRDO | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Corgi | Tradr |
| Sets out to return | +2x | +2x |
| On | CRDO | CRDO |
| Segment | company | company |
| Fund returned, 3 months | −67.5% | −69.8% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | −39.2% | −35.0% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | −78.5% | −70.1% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | +10.9 pts | +0.3 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | −62.3% | −65.3% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | −0.3 pts | −63.5 pts |
| Underlying volatility | 96% | 105% |
| Difference over the days both have traded | +10.9 pts | +11.0 pts |
| Expense ratio | not published | 1.30% |
| Launched | Jul 14, 2026 | Sep 16, 2025 |
CRD in plain words
One month to Sep 11, 2026: CRD returned −67.5% where its own daily promise gave −67.2%, 0.4 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times CRDO's −39.2% implies −78.5%, which makes CRD look 10.9 points over. 11.3 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. CRD aims to return +2 times CRDO'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. CRDO moved at 96% 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.
CRDU in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: CRDU returned −69.8% where its own daily promise gave −68.8%, 1.0 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times CRDO's −35.0% implies −70.1%, which makes CRDU look 0.3 points over. 1.2 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. CRDU aims to return +2 times CRDO's move each day, then resets. CRDO moved at 105% annualized over that window.
Questions people ask
- Which came closer to its stated multiple, CRD or CRDU?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, CRD finished 10.9 points from what its multiple implies and CRDU finished 0.3 points from its own, so CRDU came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are CRD and CRDU levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on CRDO, CRD at +2 times and CRDU at +2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, CRD or CRDU?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window CRD’s moved at 96% annualized and CRDU’s at 105%, so CRDU has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold CRD or CRDU 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.
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, CRD against CRDU, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/CRD-CRDU Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.