DUST vs GDXD: which held to its multiple?
Over three months against its own daily promise, DUST finished 1.7 points over and GDXD 0.1 points over. Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bear 2X ETF and MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs.
DUST returned −37.3% while −2 times GDX's move would have been −33.9%
GDXD returned −56.8% while −3 times GDX's move would have been −50.9%
A percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs 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
| Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Window | DUST | GDXD | DUST | GDXD | DUST | GDXD |
| 1 month | +21.4% | +29.1% | +21.7% | +32.6% | −0.3 pts | −3.5 pts |
| 3 months | −37.3% | −56.8% | −33.9% | −50.9% | −3.4 pts | −5.9 pts |
| 6 months | −12.6% | −37.7% | +17.1% | +25.6% | −29.7 pts | −63.3 pts |
| 1 year | −62.2% | −87.2% | −31.5% | −47.2% | −30.7 pts | −40.0 pts |
| 3 years | −97.0% | −99.8% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
| Since launch DUST Dec 2010 · GDXD Dec 2020 | −100.0% | −100.0% | −134.3% | not meaningful | +34.3 pts | not meaningful |
DUST and GDXD over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →
On the same fields
DUST and GDXD on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DUST in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: DUST returned −37.3% where its own daily promise gave −39.0%, 1.7 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times GDX's 17.0% implies −33.9%, which makes DUST look 3.4 points short. 5.1 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. DUST aims to return -2 times GDX'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. GDX moved at 48% 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.
GDXD in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: GDXD returned −56.8% where its own daily promise gave −56.8%, 0.1 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −3 times GDX's 17.0% implies −50.9%, which makes GDXD look 5.9 points short. 5.9 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. GDXD aims to return -3 times GDX'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, DUST or GDXD?
- Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, DUST finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and GDXD finished 5.9 points from its own, so DUST came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are DUST and GDXD levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on gold miners, DUST at -2 times and GDXD at -3 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, DUST or GDXD?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window DUST’s moved at 48% annualized and GDXD’s at 48%, so DUST has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold DUST or GDXD 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, DUST against GDXD, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dust-vs-gdxd
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, DUST against GDXD, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dust-vs-gdxd Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
Other forms
- Plain
- ETFIQ, DUST against GDXD, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dust-vs-gdxd
- APA
- ETFIQ. (Sep 30, 2026). DUST against GDXD. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dust-vs-gdxd
- Markdown
- [DUST against GDXD (ETFIQ, Sep 30, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/dust-vs-gdxd)