Data as of .
IREC vs IREX: which held to its multiple?
Over the days both have traded, IREC finished 8.6 points from its stated multiple and IREX 7.1.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IREC | IREX | IREC | IREX | IREC | IREX | |
| 1 month | −7.8% | −6.4% | +0.7% | +0.7% | −8.6 pts | −7.1 pts |
| 3 months | not published | −61.8% | not published | −53.3% | not published | −8.4 pts |
| 6 months | not published | −41.8% | not published | +10.8% | not published | −52.6 pts |
| Since launch | −2.8% | −81.8% | +27.2% | −43.1% | −30.0 pts | −38.7 pts |
| IREC Corgi IREN 2x Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of IREN | IREX Tradr 2X Long IREN Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of IREN | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Corgi | Tradr |
| Sets out to return | +2x | +2x |
| On | IREN | IREN |
| Segment | company | company |
| Fund returned, 3 months | −7.8% | −61.8% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | +0.4% | −26.7% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | +0.7% | −53.3% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | −8.6 pts | −8.4 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | −2.8% | −81.8% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | −30.0 pts | −38.7 pts |
| Underlying volatility | 80% | 115% |
| Difference over the days both have traded | −8.6 pts | −7.1 pts |
| Expense ratio | not published | 1.30% |
| Launched | Jul 14, 2026 | Oct 23, 2025 |
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. 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 80% 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.
IREX in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: IREX returned −61.8% where its own daily promise gave −59.8%, 1.9 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times IREN's −26.7% implies −53.3%, which makes IREX look 8.4 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. IREX aims to return +2 times IREN's move each day, then resets. IREN moved at 115% annualized over that window.
Questions people ask
- Which came closer to its stated multiple, IREC or IREX?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, IREC finished 8.6 points from what its multiple implies and IREX finished 8.4 points from its own, so IREX came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are IREC and IREX levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on IREN, IREC at +2 times and IREX at +2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, IREC or IREX?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window IREC’s moved at 80% annualized and IREX’s at 115%, so IREX has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold IREC or IREX 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, IREC against IREX, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/IREC-IREX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.