Data as of .
RKLZ vs RKX: which held to its multiple?
Over a month against its own daily promise, RKLZ finished 14.7 points short and RKX 0.7 points short.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RKLZ | RKX | RKLZ | RKX | RKLZ | RKX | |
| 1 month | +44.1% | −41.5% | +44.9% | −44.9% | −0.8 pts | +3.4 pts |
| 3 months | +36.5% | not published | +77.0% | not published | −40.6 pts | not published |
| 6 months | −84.8% | not published | +16.0% | not published | −100.8 pts | not published |
| Since launch | −97.5% | −66.6% | −94.3% | −76.1% | −3.2 pts | +9.6 pts |
| RKLZ Defiance Daily Target 2X Short RKLB ETF Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of RKLB | RKX Corgi RKLB 2x Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of RKLB | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Defiance | Corgi |
| Sets out to return | -2x | +2x |
| On | RKLB | RKLB |
| Segment | company | company |
| Fund returned, 3 months | +36.5% | −41.5% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | −38.5% | −22.4% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | +77.0% | −44.9% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | −40.6 pts | +3.4 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | −97.5% | −66.6% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | −3.2 pts | +9.6 pts |
| Underlying volatility | 80% | 39% |
| Difference over the days both have traded | no shared window | +3.4 pts |
| Expense ratio | 1.29% | 0.45% |
| Launched | Nov 18, 2025 | Jun 30, 2026 |
RKLZ in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: RKLZ returned +36.5% where its own daily promise gave +61.6%, 25.1 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times RKLB's −38.5% implies +77.0%, which makes RKLZ look 40.6 points short. 15.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. RKLZ aims to return -2 times RKLB'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. RKLB 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.
RKX in plain words
One month to Sep 11, 2026: RKX returned −41.5% where its own daily promise gave −40.9%, 0.7 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times RKLB's −22.4% implies −44.9%, which makes RKX look 3.4 points over. 4.0 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. RKX aims to return +2 times RKLB'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. RKLB moved at 39% annualized over that window.
Questions people ask
- Which came closer to its stated multiple, RKLZ or RKX?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, RKLZ finished 40.6 points from what its multiple implies and RKX finished 3.4 points from its own, so RKX came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are RKLZ and RKX levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on RKLB, RKLZ at -2 times and RKX at +2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, RKLZ or RKX?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window RKLZ’s moved at 80% annualized and RKX’s at 39%, so RKLZ has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold RKLZ or RKX 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, RKLZ or RKX?
- RKLZ charges 1.29% a year and RKX charges 0.45%, so RKX 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, RKLZ against RKX, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/RKLZ-RKX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.