Data as of .
IRE vs IREC: which held to its multiple?
Over the days both have traded, IRE finished 8.6 points from its stated multiple and IREC 8.6.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IRE | IREC | IRE | IREC | IRE | IREC | |
| 1 month | −7.8% | −7.8% | +0.7% | +0.7% | −8.6 pts | −8.6 pts |
| 3 months | −63.8% | not published | −53.3% | not published | −10.5 pts | not published |
| 6 months | −47.3% | not published | +10.8% | not published | −58.1 pts | not published |
| Since launch | −84.4% | −2.8% | −41.2% | +27.2% | −43.2 pts | −30.0 pts |
| IRE Defiance Daily Target 2X Long IREN ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of IREN | IREC Corgi IREN 2x Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of IREN | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Defiance | Corgi |
| Sets out to return | +2x | +2x |
| On | IREN | IREN |
| Segment | company | company |
| Fund returned, 3 months | −63.8% | −7.8% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | −26.7% | +0.4% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | −53.3% | +0.7% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | −10.5 pts | −8.6 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | −84.4% | −2.8% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | −43.2 pts | −30.0 pts |
| Underlying volatility | 115% | 80% |
| Difference over the days both have traded | −8.6 pts | −8.6 pts |
| Expense ratio | 1.35% | not published |
| Launched | Oct 21, 2025 | Jul 14, 2026 |
IRE in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: IRE returned −63.8% where its own daily promise gave −59.8%, 4.0 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times IREN's −26.7% implies −53.3%, which makes IRE look 10.5 points short. 6.5 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. IRE aims to return +2 times IREN'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. IREN moved at 115% 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.
IREC in plain words
One month to Sep 11, 2026: IREC returned −7.8% where its own daily promise gave −4.9%, 2.9 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times IREN's 0.4% implies +0.7%, which makes IREC look 8.6 points short. 5.6 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. IREC aims to return +2 times IREN's move each day, then resets. IREN moved at 80% annualized over that window.
Questions people ask
- Which came closer to its stated multiple, IRE or IREC?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, IRE finished 10.5 points from what its multiple implies and IREC finished 8.6 points from its own, so IREC came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are IRE and IREC levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on IREN, IRE at +2 times and IREC at +2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, IRE or IREC?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window IRE’s moved at 115% annualized and IREC’s at 80%, so IRE has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold IRE or IREC 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.
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, IRE against IREC, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/IRE-IREC Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.