SCC vs WANT: which held to its multiple?
Over three months against its own daily promise, SCC finished 3.0 points over and WANT 1.7 points short. ProShares UltraShort Consumer Discretionary and Direxion Daily Consumer Discretionary Bull 3X ETF.
SCC returned +17.1% while −2 times XLY's move would have been +15.3%
WANT returned −25.1% while 3 times XLY's move would have been −22.9%
SCC among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months
WANT among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months
A percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months. WANT 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 | SCC | WANT | SCC | WANT | SCC | WANT |
| 1 month | +14.5% | −19.4% | +12.9% | −19.3% | +1.6 pts | −0.1 pts |
| 3 months | +17.1% | −25.1% | +15.3% | −22.9% | +1.8 pts | −2.2 pts |
| 6 months | 0.0% | −11.5% | +0.9% | −1.4% | −0.9 pts | −10.2 pts |
| 1 year | +18.0% | −38.2% | +16.8% | −25.3% | +1.2 pts | −12.9 pts |
| 3 years | −50.6% | +27.3% | −77.2% | +115.8% | +26.6 pts | −88.5 pts |
| Since launch SCC Jan 2010 · WANT Nov 2018 | −99.6% | +36.5% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
SCC and WANT over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →
On the same fields
SCC and WANT on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
SCC in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: SCC returned +17.1% where its own daily promise gave +14.1%, 3.0 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times XLY's −7.6% implies +15.3%, which makes SCC look 1.8 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. SCC aims to return -2 times XLY'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. XLY moved at 19% 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.
WANT in plain words
Three months to Sep 30, 2026: WANT returned −25.1% where its own daily promise gave −23.4%, 1.7 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 3 times XLY's −7.6% implies −22.9%, which makes WANT look 2.2 points short. 0.5 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. WANT aims to return +3 times XLY'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, SCC or WANT?
- Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, SCC finished 1.8 points from what its multiple implies and WANT finished 2.2 points from its own, so SCC came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are SCC and WANT levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on State Street Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF, SCC at -2 times and WANT at +3 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, SCC or WANT?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window SCC’s moved at 19% annualized and WANT’s at 19%, so SCC has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold SCC or WANT 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, SCC against WANT, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/scc-vs-want
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, SCC against WANT, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/scc-vs-want Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
Other forms
- Plain
- ETFIQ, SCC against WANT, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/scc-vs-want
- APA
- ETFIQ. (Sep 30, 2026). SCC against WANT. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/scc-vs-want
- Markdown
- [SCC against WANT (ETFIQ, Sep 30, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/scc-vs-want)