MUD vs MULL: which held to its multiple?
Over three months against its own daily promise, MUD finished 1.6 points over and MULL 5.1 points short. Direxion Daily MU Bear 1X ETF and GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF.
MUD returned −14.5% while −1 times MU's move would have been −3.2%
MULL returned −12.3% while 2 times MU's move would have been +6.4%
MUD among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months
MULL among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months
A percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months. MULL 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 | MUD | MULL | MUD | MULL | MUD | MULL |
| 1 month | −11.7% | +19.8% | −11.1% | +22.2% | −0.6 pts | −2.4 pts |
| 3 months | −14.5% | −12.3% | −3.2% | +6.4% | −11.3 pts | −18.7 pts |
| 6 months | −76.7% | +409.9% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
| 1 year | −91.5% | +1674.5% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
| Since launch MUD Oct 2024 · MULL Nov 2024 | −96.0% | +2717.1% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
MUD and MULL over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →
On the same fields
MUD and MULL on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MUD in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: MUD returned −14.5% where its own daily promise gave −16.1%, 1.6 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −1 times MU's 3.2% implies −3.2%, which makes MUD look 11.3 points short. 12.9 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −1 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. MUD aims to return -1 times MU's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. 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. MU moved at 76% 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.
MULL in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: MULL returned −12.3% where its own daily promise gave −7.2%, 5.1 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 2 times MU's 3.2% implies +6.4%, which makes MULL look 18.7 points short. 13.6 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. MULL aims to return +2 times MU'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, MUD or MULL?
- Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, MUD finished 11.3 points from what its multiple implies and MULL finished 18.7 points from its own, so MUD came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are MUD and MULL levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on Micron Technology, MUD at -1 times and MULL at +2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, MUD or MULL?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window MUD’s moved at 76% annualized and MULL’s at 76%, so MUD has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold MUD or MULL 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, MUD against MULL, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/mud-vs-mull
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, MUD against MULL, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/mud-vs-mull Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
Other forms
- Plain
- ETFIQ, MUD against MULL, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/mud-vs-mull
- APA
- ETFIQ. (Sep 30, 2026). MUD against MULL. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/mud-vs-mull
- Markdown
- [MUD against MULL (ETFIQ, Sep 30, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/mud-vs-mull)