Data as of .
RAM vs RAML: which held to its multiple?
Over the days both have traded, RAM finished 4.7 points from its stated multiple and RAML 3.9.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RAM | RAML | RAM | RAML | RAM | RAML | |
| 1 month | +11.0% | +11.8% | +15.7% | +15.7% | −4.7 pts | −3.9 pts |
| Since launch | −43.6% | −8.1% | −31.0% | +2.7% | −12.7 pts | −10.9 pts |
| RAM Roundhill Daily 2X Long Memory ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of Memory (DRAM) | RAML Leverage Shares 2X Long Memory Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of Memory (DRAM) | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Roundhill | Leverage Shares |
| Sets out to return | +2x | +2x |
| On | DRAM | DRAM |
| Segment | sector | sector |
| Fund returned, 3 months | +11.0% | +11.8% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | +7.8% | +7.8% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | +15.7% | +15.7% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | −4.7 pts | −3.9 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | −43.6% | −8.1% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | −12.7 pts | −10.9 pts |
| Underlying volatility | 58% | 58% |
| Difference over the days both have traded | −4.7 pts | −3.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.99% | 0.99% |
| Launched | Jun 24, 2026 | Jul 23, 2026 |
RAM in plain words
One month to Sep 11, 2026: RAM returned +11.0% where its own daily promise gave +12.9%, 1.9 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times DRAM's 7.8% implies +15.7%, which makes RAM look 4.7 points short. 2.8 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. RAM aims to return +2 times DRAM'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. DRAM moved at 58% 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.
RAML in plain words
One month to Sep 11, 2026: RAML returned +11.8% where its own daily promise gave +12.9%, 1.1 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times DRAM's 7.8% implies +15.7%, which makes RAML look 3.9 points short. RAML aims to return +2 times DRAM's move each day, then resets.
Questions people ask
- Which came closer to its stated multiple, RAM or RAML?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, RAM finished 4.7 points from what its multiple implies and RAML finished 3.9 points from its own, so RAML came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are RAM and RAML levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on Memory, RAM at +2 times and RAML at +2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, RAM or RAML?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window RAM’s moved at 58% annualized and RAML’s at 58%, so RAM has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold RAM or RAML 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, RAM or RAML?
- RAM charges 0.99% a year and RAML charges 0.99%, so RAM 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, RAM against RAML, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/RAM-RAML Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.