SRTY vs TWM: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, SRTY finished 4.4 points over and TWM 3.0 points over. ProShares UltraPro Short Russell2000 and ProShares UltraShort Russell2000.

+25.2%
SRTY returned, 3 months
+16.9%
TWM returned, 3 months
+4.5 pts
SRTY from its stated multiple
+3.0 pts
TWM from its stated multiple
SRTY · 3 months to Sep 30, 20264.5 pts ahead of its stated multiple
4.5 pts ahead of its stated multipleSRTY returned +25.2% while −3 times IWM's move would have been +20.8%IWM −6.9% ×−3 implies+20.8%SRTY returned+25.2%4.5 pts ahead of its stated multipleSRTY returned +25.2% while −3 times IWM's move would have been +20.8%IWM −6.9% ×−3 implies+20.8%SRTY returned+25.2%

SRTY returned +25.2% while −3 times IWM's move would have been +20.8%

TWM · 3 months to Sep 30, 20263 pts ahead of its stated multiple
3 pts ahead of its stated multipleTWM returned +16.9% while −2 times IWM's move would have been +13.8%IWM −6.9% ×−2 implies+13.8%TWM returned+16.9%3 pts ahead of its stated multipleTWM returned +16.9% while −2 times IWM's move would have been +13.8%IWM −6.9% ×−2 implies+13.8%TWM returned+16.9%

TWM returned +16.9% while −2 times IWM's move would have been +13.8%

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score · SRTY 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
WindowSRTYTWMSRTYTWMSRTYTWM
1 month+18.0%+11.9%+15.6%+10.4%+2.4 pts+1.5 pts
3 months+25.2%+16.9%+20.8%+13.8%+4.5 pts+3.0 pts
6 months−29.6%−19.5%−35.7%−23.8%+6.1 pts+4.3 pts
1 year−40.2%−26.1%−48.1%−32.0%+7.8 pts+6.0 pts
3 years−83.2%−64.3%−187.7%−125.2%+104.5 pts+60.8 pts
Since launch
SRTY Feb 2010 · TWM Jan 2010
−100.0%−99.6%not meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningful

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

On the same fields

SRTY
ProShares UltraPro Short Russell2000 · Aims to return three times the opposite of the daily move of the Russell 2000
TWM
ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 · Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of the Russell 2000
Issuer ProShares ProShares
Sets out to return -3x -2x
Underlying asset IWM IWM
Segment us small cap us small cap
Fund returned, 3 months or since launch +25.2% +16.9%
Underlying returned, over that window −6.9% −6.9%
What the stated multiple implies, over that window +20.8% +13.8%
Difference from stated, over that window +4.5 pts +3.0 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch −40.2% −26.1%
Difference from stated, over that window +7.8 pts +6.0 pts
Underlying volatility 13% 13%
Difference over the days both have traded +4.5 pts no shared window
Expense ratio 0.95% 0.95%
Launched Feb 11, 2010 Jan 4, 2010
Net assets $73m $66m

SRTY and TWM on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

SRTY in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: SRTY returned +25.2% where its own daily promise gave +20.8%, 4.4 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −3 times IWM's −6.9% implies +20.8%, which makes SRTY look 4.5 points over. 0.0 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. SRTY aims to return -3 times IWM's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. 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. IWM 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.

TWM in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: TWM returned +16.9% where its own daily promise gave +13.9%, 3.0 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times IWM's −6.9% implies +13.8%, which makes TWM look 3.0 points over. 0.1 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. TWM aims to return -2 times IWM'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, SRTY or TWM?
Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, SRTY finished 4.5 points from what its multiple implies and TWM finished 3.0 points from its own, so TWM came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are SRTY and TWM levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on the Russell 2000, SRTY at -3 times and TWM at -2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, SRTY or TWM?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window SRTY’s moved at 13% annualized and TWM’s at 13%, so SRTY has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold SRTY or TWM 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, SRTY or TWM?
SRTY charges 0.95% a year and TWM charges 0.95%, so SRTY is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Cite this page

ETFIQ, SRTY against TWM, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/srty-vs-twm

Open data

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