MUU vs MUZ: which held to its multiple?
Over three months against its own daily promise, MUU finished 5.8 points short and MUZ 3.1 points short. Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X ETF and Defiance Daily Target 2X Short MU ETF.
MUU returned −12.9% while 2 times MU's move would have been +6.4%
MUZ returned −43.2% while −2 times MU's move would have been −6.4%
MUU among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months
MUZ among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months
A percentile among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months. MUZ is a percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs 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 | MUU | MUZ | MUU | MUZ | MUU | MUZ |
| 1 month | +20.9% | −25.8% | +22.2% | −22.2% | −1.3 pts | −3.6 pts |
| 3 months | −12.9% | −43.2% | +6.4% | −6.4% | −19.3 pts | −36.8 pts |
| 6 months | +423.3% | not published | not meaningful | not published | not meaningful | not published |
| 1 year | +1777.1% | not published | not meaningful | not published | not meaningful | not published |
| Since launch MUU Oct 2024 · MUZ Jun 2026 | +2831.1% | −67.1% | not meaningful | −27.6% | not meaningful | −39.5 pts |
MUU and MUZ over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →
On the same fields
MUU and MUZ on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MUU in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: MUU returned −12.9% where its own daily promise gave −7.2%, 5.8 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 2 times MU's 3.2% implies +6.4%, which makes MUU look 19.3 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. MUU aims to return +2 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 +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. 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.
MUZ in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: MUZ returned −43.2% where its own daily promise gave −40.1%, 3.1 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times MU's 3.2% implies −6.4%, which makes MUZ look 36.8 points short. 33.7 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. MUZ 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, MUU or MUZ?
- Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, MUU finished 19.3 points from what its multiple implies and MUZ finished 36.8 points from its own, so MUU came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are MUU and MUZ levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on Micron Technology, MUU at +2 times and MUZ at -2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, MUU or MUZ?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window MUU’s moved at 76% annualized and MUZ’s at 76%, so MUU has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold MUU or MUZ 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, MUU against MUZ, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/muu-vs-muz
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, MUU against MUZ, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/muu-vs-muz Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
Other forms
- Plain
- ETFIQ, MUU against MUZ, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/muu-vs-muz
- APA
- ETFIQ. (Sep 30, 2026). MUU against MUZ. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/muu-vs-muz
- Markdown
- [MUU against MUZ (ETFIQ, Sep 30, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/muu-vs-muz)