DULL vs UGL: which held to its multiple?
Over three months against its own daily promise, DULL finished 1.2 points over and UGL 0.9 points short. MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due January 29, 2043 and ProShares Ultra Gold.
DULL returned −14.8% while −3 times GLD's move would have been −8.3%
UGL returned +3.1% while 2 times GLD's move would have been +5.5%
DULL among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months
UGL among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months
A percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months. UGL is a percentile among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months, a different set, so the two marks are not on one scale. 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
| Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Window | DULL | UGL | DULL | UGL | DULL | UGL |
| 1 month | +20.3% | −13.6% | +20.3% | −13.5% | 0.0 pts | −0.1 pts |
| 3 months | −14.8% | +3.1% | −8.3% | +5.5% | −6.5 pts | −2.4 pts |
| 6 months | +31.4% | −28.0% | +39.0% | −26.0% | −7.7 pts | −1.9 pts |
| 1 year | −48.5% | −0.7% | −21.4% | +14.3% | −27.1 pts | −15.0 pts |
| 3 years | −94.8% | +247.8% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
| Since launch DULL Feb 2023 · UGL Jan 2010 | −94.9% | +291.6% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
DULL and UGL over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →
On the same fields
DULL and UGL on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DULL in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: DULL returned −14.8% where its own daily promise gave −15.9%, 1.2 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −3 times GLD's 2.8% implies −8.3%, which makes DULL look 6.5 points short. 7.6 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. DULL aims to return -3 times GLD'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. GLD moved at 25% 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.
UGL in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: UGL returned +3.1% where its own daily promise gave +4.0%, 0.9 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 2 times GLD's 2.8% implies +5.5%, which makes UGL look 2.4 points short. 1.5 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. UGL aims to return +2 times GLD'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, DULL or UGL?
- Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, DULL finished 6.5 points from what its multiple implies and UGL finished 2.4 points from its own, so UGL came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are DULL and UGL levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on gold, DULL at -3 times and UGL at +2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, DULL or UGL?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window DULL’s moved at 25% annualized and UGL’s at 25%, so DULL has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold DULL or UGL 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.
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.
ETFIQ, DULL against UGL, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dull-vs-ugl
Free to use with attribution. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, DULL against UGL, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dull-vs-ugl Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
Other forms
- Plain
- ETFIQ, DULL against UGL, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dull-vs-ugl
- APA
- ETFIQ. (Sep 30, 2026). DULL against UGL. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dull-vs-ugl
- Markdown
- [DULL against UGL (ETFIQ, Sep 30, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dull-vs-ugl)