Data as of .
WEBL vs WEBS: which held to its multiple?
Over three months against its own daily promise, WEBL finished 2.6 points short and WEBS 2.5 points over.
ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score: WEBS 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 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WEBL | WEBS | WEBL | WEBS | WEBL | WEBS | |
| 1 month | −3.9% | +2.3% | −2.5% | +2.5% | −1.4 pts | −0.2 pts |
| 3 months | +23.6% | −26.0% | +27.9% | −27.9% | −4.3 pts | +1.9 pts |
| 6 months | +55.7% | −46.9% | +61.0% | −61.0% | −5.3 pts | +14.1 pts |
| 1 year | −14.8% | −15.9% | +5.8% | −5.8% | −20.7 pts | −10.1 pts |
| 3 years | +131.1% | −86.0% | +208.4% | −208.4% | −77.3 pts | +122.4 pts |
| Since launch | +23.1% | −99.3% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
| WEBL Direxion Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X ETF Aims to return three times the daily move of FIRST TRUST DOW JONES INTERNET INDEX FUND (FDN) | WEBS Direxion Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X ETF Aims to return three times the opposite of the daily move of FIRST TRUST DOW JONES INTERNET INDEX FUND (FDN) | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Direxion | Direxion |
| Sets out to return | +3x | -3x |
| On | FDN | FDN |
| Segment | sector | sector |
| Fund returned, 3 months | +23.6% | −26.0% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | +9.3% | +9.3% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | +27.9% | −27.9% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | −4.3 pts | +1.9 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | −14.8% | −15.9% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | −20.7 pts | −10.1 pts |
| Underlying volatility | 21% | 21% |
| Expense ratio | 0.96% | 1.07% |
| Launched | Nov 7, 2019 | Nov 7, 2019 |
WEBL in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: WEBL returned +23.6% where its own daily promise gave +26.2%, 2.6 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +3 times FDN's 9.3% implies +27.9%, which makes WEBL look 4.3 points short. 1.7 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. WEBL aims to return +3 times FDN's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +3 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. FDN moved at 21% 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.
WEBS in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: WEBS returned −26.0% where its own daily promise gave −28.5%, 2.5 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −3 times FDN's 9.3% implies −27.9%, which makes WEBS look 1.9 points over. 0.6 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. WEBS aims to return -3 times FDN's move each day, then resets. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not -3 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, WEBL or WEBS?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, WEBL finished 4.3 points from what its multiple implies and WEBS finished 1.9 points from its own, so WEBS came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are WEBL and WEBS levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on FIRST TRUST DOW JONES INTERNET INDEX FUND, WEBL at +3 times and WEBS at -3 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, WEBL or WEBS?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window WEBL’s moved at 21% annualized and WEBS’s at 21%, so WEBL has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold WEBL or WEBS 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, WEBL or WEBS?
- WEBL charges 0.96% a year and WEBS charges 1.07%, so WEBL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
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, WEBL against WEBS, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/WEBL-WEBS Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.