Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

MIC vs MULL: which held to its multiple?

Over the days both have traded, MIC finished 0.4 points from its stated multiple and MULL 0.3.

Corgi MU 2x Daily ETF and GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF, side by side, leveraged ETFs on ETFIQ.

−39.7%MIC returned, 3 months
−24.5%MULL returned, 3 months
−8.7 ptsMIC from its stated multiple
−23.2 ptsMULL from its stated multiple
MIC3.4 pts short of its label · 1 month to Sep 11, 2026
MU +7.0% ×2 implies+14.0%MIC returned+10.7%MU +7.0% ×2 implies+14.0%MIC returned+10.7%
MULL23.2 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
MU −0.6% ×2 implies−1.3%MULL returned−24.5%MU −0.6% ×2 implies−1.3%MULL returned−24.5%

Performance, window by window

MIC and MULL over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnMultiple would giveDifference
MICMULLMICMULLMICMULL
1 month+10.7%+9.7%+14.0%+14.0%−3.4 pts−4.3 pts
3 monthsnot published−24.5%not published−1.3%not published−23.2 pts
6 monthsnot published+211.0%not publishednot meaningfulnot publishednot meaningful
1 yearnot published+1739.1%not publishednot meaningfulnot publishednot meaningful
Since launch−39.7%+2301.6%−31.0%not meaningful−8.7 ptsnot meaningful
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
MIC and MULL on the same fields, as of Sep 11, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MIC
Corgi MU 2x Daily ETF
Aims to return twice the daily move of MU
MULL
GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF
Aims to return twice the daily move of MU
IssuerCorgiGraniteShares
Sets out to return+2x+2x
OnMUMU
Segmentcompanycompany
Fund returned, 3 months+10.7%−24.5%
Underlying returned, 3 months+7.0%−0.6%
What the stated multiple implies, 3 months+14.0%−1.3%
Difference from stated, 3 months−3.4 pts−23.2 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch−39.7%+1739.1%
Difference from stated, over that window−8.7 ptsnot available
Underlying volatility53%94%
Difference over the days both have traded+0.4 pts−0.3 pts
Expense ratio0.45%1.50%
LaunchedJun 30, 2026Nov 12, 2024

MIC in plain words

One month to Sep 11, 2026: MIC returned +10.7% where its own daily promise gave +11.8%, 1.1 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times MU's 7.0% implies +14.0%, which makes MIC look 3.4 points short. 2.3 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. MIC aims to return +2 times MU'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. MU moved at 53% 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.

MULL in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: MULL returned −24.5% where its own daily promise gave −20.1%, 4.4 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times MU's −0.6% implies −1.3%, which makes MULL look 23.2 points short. 18.8 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. MULL aims to return +2 times MU's move each day, then resets. MU moved at 94% annualized over that window.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, MIC or MULL?
Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, MIC finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and MULL finished 23.2 points from its own, so MIC came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are MIC and MULL levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on MU, MIC at +2 times and MULL at +2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, MIC or MULL?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window MIC’s moved at 53% annualized and MULL’s at 94%, so MULL has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold MIC or MULL 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, MIC or MULL?
MIC charges 0.45% a year and MULL charges 1.50%, so MIC 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.

MIC against MULL, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 11, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, MIC against MULL, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/MIC-MULL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources