EFU vs EFZ: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, EFU finished 1.5 points over and EFZ 1.1 points over. ProShares UltraShort MSCI EAFE and ProShares Short MSCI EAFE.

−1.4%
EFU returned, 3 months
−0.1%
EFZ returned, 3 months
+0.3 pts
EFU from its stated multiple
+0.7 pts
EFZ from its stated multiple
EFU · 3 months to Sep 30, 2026On its stated multiple
On its stated multipleEFU returned −1.4% while −2 times EFA's move would have been −1.7%EFA +0.8% ×−2 implies−1.7%EFU returned−1.4%On its stated multipleEFU returned −1.4% while −2 times EFA's move would have been −1.7%EFA +0.8% ×−2 implies−1.7%EFU returned−1.4%

EFU returned −1.4% while −2 times EFA's move would have been −1.7%

EFZ · 3 months to Sep 30, 20260.7 pts ahead of its stated multiple
0.7 pts ahead of its stated multipleEFZ returned −0.1% while −1 times EFA's move would have been −0.8%EFA +0.8% ×−1 implies−0.8%EFZ returned−0.1%0.7 pts ahead of its stated multipleEFZ returned −0.1% while −1 times EFA's move would have been −0.8%EFA +0.8% ×−1 implies−0.8%EFZ returned−0.1%

EFZ returned −0.1% while −1 times EFA's move would have been −0.8%

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score · EFU scores higherDid it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?
0.4, the lowest in this set99.6, the highest

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 returnMultiple would giveDifference
WindowEFUEFZEFUEFZEFUEFZ
1 month+7.3%+3.5%+6.6%+3.3%+0.6 pts+0.2 pts
3 months−1.4%−0.1%−1.7%−0.8%+0.3 pts+0.7 pts
6 months−12.4%−5.4%−14.0%−7.0%+1.6 pts+1.6 pts
1 year−23.5%−10.6%−30.1%−15.1%+6.6 pts+4.5 pts
3 years−60.4%−30.8%−131.3%−65.7%+71.0 pts+34.9 pts
Since launch
EFU Jan 2010 · EFZ Jan 2010
−97.0%−75.6%not meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningful

EFU and EFZ over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →

On the same fields

EFU
ProShares UltraShort MSCI EAFE · Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of developed markets outside the US (EFA)
EFZ
ProShares Short MSCI EAFE · Aims to return 1 times the opposite of the daily move of developed markets outside the US (EFA)
Issuer ProShares ProShares
Sets out to return -2x -1x
Underlying asset EFA EFA
Segment sector sector
Fund returned, 3 months or since launch −1.4% −0.1%
Underlying returned, over that window +0.8% +0.8%
What the stated multiple implies, over that window −1.7% −0.8%
Difference from stated, over that window +0.3 pts +0.7 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch −23.5% −10.6%
Difference from stated, over that window +6.6 pts +4.5 pts
Underlying volatility 13% 13%
Expense ratio 0.95% 0.95%
Launched Jan 4, 2010 Jan 4, 2010
Net assets $1m $10m

EFU and EFZ on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

EFU in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: EFU returned −1.4% where its own daily promise gave −2.9%, 1.5 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times EFA's 0.8% implies −1.7%, which makes EFU look 0.3 points over. 1.2 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. EFU aims to return -2 times EFA'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. EFA moved at 13% 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.

EFZ in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: EFZ returned −0.1% where its own daily promise gave −1.3%, 1.1 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −1 times EFA's 0.8% implies −0.8%, which makes EFZ look 0.7 points over. 0.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −1 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. EFZ aims to return -1 times EFA's move each day, then resets. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not -1 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, EFU or EFZ?
Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, EFU finished 0.3 points from what its multiple implies and EFZ finished 0.7 points from its own, so EFU came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are EFU and EFZ levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on developed markets outside the US, EFU at -2 times and EFZ at -1 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, EFU or EFZ?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window EFU’s moved at 13% annualized and EFZ’s at 13%, so EFU has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold EFU or EFZ 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, EFU or EFZ?
EFU charges 0.95% a year and EFZ charges 0.95%, so EFU 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. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page

ETFIQ, EFU against EFZ, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/efu-vs-efz

Open data

Free to use with attribution. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology.