Which came closer to its stated multiple, WEBL or WEBS?

Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, WEBL finished 4.5 points from what its multiple implies and WEBS finished 0.2 points from its own, so WEBS came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.

Are WEBL and WEBS levered on the same thing?

Yes. Both are levered on First Trust DJ Internet Index Fund, WEBL at +3 times and WEBS at -3 times the daily move.

Which one decays faster, WEBL or WEBS?

Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window WEBL’s moved at 20% annualized and WEBS’s at 20%, so WEBL has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.

Can I hold WEBL or WEBS 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, WEBL or WEBS?

WEBL charges 0.96% a year and WEBS charges 1.07%, so WEBL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Share on X Download as PDF Open live

WEBL vs WEBS: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, WEBL finished 2.3 points short and WEBS 2.4 points over. Direxion Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X ETF and Direxion Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X ETF.

+16.5%

WEBL returned, 3 months

−20.8%

WEBS returned, 3 months

−4.5 pts

WEBL from its stated multiple

+0.2 pts

WEBS from its stated multiple

WEBL · 3 months to Sep 30, 20264.5 pts short of its stated multiple

WEBL returned +16.5% while 3 times FDN's move would have been +21.0%

WEBS · 3 months to Sep 30, 2026On its stated multiple

WEBS returned −20.8% while −3 times FDN's move would have been −21.0%

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score · WEBS scores higherDid it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?

WEBL among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months

WEBL 60.7

0.1, the lowest in this set99.9, the highest

WEBS among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months

WEBS 71.6

0.4, the lowest in this set99.6, the highest

A percentile among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months. WEBS 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	WEBL	WEBS	WEBL	WEBS	WEBL	WEBS
1 month	−5.6%	+3.3%	−4.1%	+4.1%	−1.5 pts	−0.9 pts
3 months	+16.5%	−20.8%	+21.0%	−21.0%	−4.5 pts	+0.2 pts
6 months	+64.3%	−48.7%	+66.8%	−66.8%	−2.5 pts	+18.1 pts
1 year	−12.3%	−19.9%	+9.2%	−9.2%	−21.5 pts	−10.6 pts
3 years	+180.3%	−88.6%	+242.2%	−242.2%	−61.9 pts	+153.6 pts
Since launch WEBL Nov 2019 · WEBS Nov 2019	+21.2%	−99.3%	not meaningful	not meaningful	not meaningful	not meaningful

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

On the same fields

WEBL

Direxion Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X ETF · Aims to return three times the daily move of First Trust DJ Internet Index Fund (FDN)

WEBS

Direxion Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X ETF · Aims to return three times the opposite of the daily move of First Trust DJ Internet Index Fund (FDN)

Issuer Direxion Direxion

Sets out to return +3x -3x

Underlying asset FDN FDN

Segment sector sector

Fund returned, 3 months or since launch +16.5% −20.8%

Underlying returned, over that window +7.0% +7.0%

What the stated multiple implies, over that window +21.0% −21.0%

Difference from stated, over that window −4.5 pts +0.2 pts

Fund returned, 1 year or since launch −12.3% −19.9%

Difference from stated, over that window −21.5 pts −10.6 pts

Underlying volatility 20% 20%

Expense ratio 0.96% 1.07%

Launched Nov 7, 2019 Nov 7, 2019

Net assets $86m $7m

WEBL and WEBS on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

WEBL in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: WEBL returned +16.5% where its own daily promise gave +18.8%, 2.3 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 3 times FDN's 7.0% implies +21.0%, which makes WEBL look 4.5 points short. 2.2 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. WEBL aims to return +3 times FDN'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. FDN moved at 20% 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.

WEBS in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: WEBS returned −20.8% where its own daily promise gave −23.3%, 2.4 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −3 times FDN's 7.0% implies −21.0%, which makes WEBS look 0.2 points over. 2.3 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. WEBS aims to return -3 times FDN'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, WEBL or WEBS?: Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, WEBL finished 4.5 points from what its multiple implies and WEBS finished 0.2 points from its own, so WEBS came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are WEBL and WEBS levered on the same thing?: Yes. Both are levered on First Trust DJ Internet Index Fund, WEBL at +3 times and WEBS at -3 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, WEBL or WEBS?: Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window WEBL’s moved at 20% annualized and WEBS’s at 20%, so WEBL has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold WEBL or WEBS 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, WEBL or WEBS?: WEBL charges 0.96% a year and WEBS charges 1.07%, so WEBL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

FDN →WEBL on its own →WEBS on its own →How every figure is computed →Standards and sources →

Where these figures came from

WEBL and WEBS filings on SEC EDGAR ↗WEBL and WEBS prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Direxion website ↗

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, WEBL against WEBS, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/webl-vs-webs

Open data

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