Data as of .
SMU vs SMZ: which held to its multiple?
Over three months against its own daily promise, SMU finished 4.0 points short and SMZ 2.5 points short.
ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score: SMU scores higher
Did it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?
A percentile among the 391 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All leveraged ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMU | SMZ | SMU | SMZ | SMU | SMZ | |
| 1 month | −27.6% | −4.7% | −20.4% | +20.4% | −7.2 pts | −25.1 pts |
| 3 months | −42.7% | −34.0% | −25.9% | +25.9% | −16.8 pts | −59.9 pts |
| 6 months | −70.8% | −60.5% | −54.1% | +54.1% | −16.7 pts | −114.5 pts |
| 1 year | −98.4% | not published | −151.1% | not published | +52.7 pts | not published |
| Since launch | −98.8% | −38.8% | −154.1% | +89.4% | +55.3 pts | −128.2 pts |
| SMU Tradr 2X Long SMR Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of SMR | SMZ Tradr 2X Short SMR Daily ETF Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of SMR | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Tradr | Tradr |
| Sets out to return | +2x | -2x |
| On | SMR | SMR |
| Segment | company | company |
| Fund returned, 3 months | −42.7% | −34.0% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | −12.9% | −12.9% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | −25.9% | +25.9% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | −16.8 pts | −59.9 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | −98.4% | −38.8% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | +52.7 pts | −128.2 pts |
| Underlying volatility | 93% | 93% |
| Difference over the days both have traded | −7.2 pts | no shared window |
| Expense ratio | 1.30% | 1.49% |
| Launched | Jul 11, 2025 | Feb 11, 2026 |
SMU in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: SMU returned −42.7% where its own daily promise gave −38.7%, 4.0 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times SMR's −12.9% implies −25.9%, which makes SMU look 16.8 points short. 12.8 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. SMU aims to return +2 times SMR'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. SMR moved at 93% 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.
SMZ in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: SMZ returned −34.0% where its own daily promise gave −31.5%, 2.5 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times SMR's −12.9% implies +25.9%, which makes SMZ look 59.9 points short. 57.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. SMZ aims to return -2 times SMR'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.
Questions people ask
- Which came closer to its stated multiple, SMU or SMZ?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, SMU finished 16.8 points from what its multiple implies and SMZ finished 59.9 points from its own, so SMU came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are SMU and SMZ levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on SMR, SMU at +2 times and SMZ at -2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, SMU or SMZ?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window SMU’s moved at 93% annualized and SMZ’s at 93%, so SMU has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold SMU or SMZ 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, SMU or SMZ?
- SMU charges 1.30% a year and SMZ charges 1.49%, so SMU 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, SMU against SMZ, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/SMU-SMZ Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.