Which came closer to its stated multiple, MIC or MUZ?

Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, MIC finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and MUZ finished 53.3 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 MUZ levered on the same thing?

Yes. Both are levered on MU, MIC at +2 times and MUZ at -2 times the daily move.

Which one decays faster, MIC or MUZ?

Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window MIC’s moved at 53% annualized and MUZ’s at 94%, so MUZ has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.

Can I hold MIC or MUZ 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 MUZ?

MIC charges 0.45% a year and MUZ charges 1.31%, so MIC is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of Sep 11, 2026.

MIC vs MUZ: which held to its multiple?

Over a month against its own daily promise, MIC finished 1.1 points short and MUZ 2.1 points short.

Corgi MU 2x Daily ETF and Defiance Daily Target 2X Short MU ETF, side by side, leveraged ETFs on ETFIQ.

−39.7%MIC returned, 3 months

−52.0%MUZ returned, 3 months

−8.7 ptsMIC from its stated multiple

−53.3 ptsMUZ from its stated multiple

MIC3.4 pts short of its label · 1 month to Sep 11, 2026

MUZ53.3 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026

Performance, window by window

MIC and MUZ over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
Window	Total return		Multiple would give		Difference
Window	MIC	MUZ	MIC	MUZ	MIC	MUZ
1 month	+10.7%	−20.8%	+14.0%	−14.0%	−3.4 pts	−6.8 pts
3 months	not published	−52.0%	not published	+1.3%	not published	−53.3 pts
Since launch	−39.7%	−59.0%	−31.0%	−8.4%	−8.7 pts	−50.6 pts

Open the live comparison on ETFIQ

MIC and MUZ 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	MUZ Defiance Daily Target 2X Short MU ETF Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of MU
Issuer	Corgi	Defiance
Sets out to return	+2x	-2x
On	MU	MU
Segment	company	company
Fund returned, 3 months	+10.7%	−52.0%
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	−53.3 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch	−39.7%	−59.0%
Difference from stated, over that window	−8.7 pts	−50.6 pts
Underlying volatility	53%	94%
Difference over the days both have traded	+0.4 pts	no shared window
Expense ratio	0.45%	1.31%
Launched	Jun 30, 2026	Jun 9, 2026

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.

MUZ in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: MUZ returned −52.0% where its own daily promise gave −48.9%, 3.1 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times MU's −0.6% implies +1.3%, which makes MUZ look 53.3 points short. 50.1 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. MUZ aims to return -2 times MU'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. MU moved at 94% annualized over that window.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, MIC or MUZ?: Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, MIC finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and MUZ finished 53.3 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 MUZ levered on the same thing?: Yes. Both are levered on MU, MIC at +2 times and MUZ at -2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, MIC or MUZ?: Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window MIC’s moved at 53% annualized and MUZ’s at 94%, so MUZ has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold MIC or MUZ 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 MUZ?: MIC charges 0.45% a year and MUZ charges 1.31%, 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 MUZ, 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 MUZ, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/MIC-MUZ Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources