The stated multiple and what the holder got
Over the three months to Sep 8, 2026, 322 of 389 leveraged and inverse ETFs returned less than their own stated multiple would imply. The median fund finished -6.2 points from its stated multiple.
These funds deliver the multiple over a single day and reset. Daily results compound, so a run of days is not the multiple times the period's move, and the gap widens with how far the underlying travels rather than with where it ends up.
63 underlyings carry the same stated multiple from more than one issuer. Same mandate, same days, and the spread between the closest and the furthest is in the second table.
Over the three months to Sep 8, 2026, 322 of 389 leveraged and inverse ETFs returned less than their own stated multiple would imply. The median fund finished 6.2 points short of what its stated multiple, applied to the underlying's move over the period, would suggest. These funds are built to deliver their multiple over a single day, then reset. Because daily results compound, a run of days does not add up to the multiple times the period's move. The gap that opens up tracks how far the underlying travelled during the period, not where it ended up, so a security that whipsawed and finished flat can still show a wide gap.
That pattern holds across holding periods. At one month, 317 of 424 funds fell short, with a median difference of −1.3% against a median underlying move of 2.1%. At six months the shortfall widens to −12.8%, at one year to −11.7%, and at three years to −19.4%. The three-year figures cover fewer funds, 103 in total, and the underlyings in that group carried a lower median volatility, 20%, than the three-month group's 51%. Distance travelled, not calendar time on its own, appears to be doing the work.
That link to volatility is set out directly in the third table. Funds tracking underlyings with volatility between 0% and 30% showed a median difference of −1.7% over three months, with 73 of 111 short of stated. Funds against 30%-to-50% volatility underlyings showed −5.7%, with 63 of 70 short. In the 50%-to-80% band the median difference was −9.3%, with 89 of 105 short. Above 80% volatility, the median difference reached −20.4%, with 97 of 103 short. The underlying's median volatility rises through these bands from 18% to 93%, and the median gap widens alongside it.
Sixty-three underlyings carry the same stated multiple from more than one issuer, and the second table shows how far results diverged even under identical mandates and identical days. The widest recorded spread was in MARA +2x funds, where two issuers produced results 40.6 points apart against an underlying move of −11.1%, with MARU at +24.8 and MRAL at −15.8. AMD -2x funds from three issuers spread 40.4 points, from AMDS at +12.7 to DAMD at −27.7, against an underlying move of +6.4%. XRPR +2x funds spread 35.1 points and PLTR -2x funds spread 34.1 points. At the narrow end, RGTI +2x, SMR +2x, SOFI +2x, IREN +2x, SNDK +2x and HOOD +2x funds all showed spreads under 4 points, meaning issuers offering the same stated multiple on the same underlying produced results that sat close together over these three months.
Readers can pull up any fund on the live desk and check its own stated multiple against its measured result over the window of their choosing, alongside the underlying's volatility for that same period.
How far from the stated multiple, by how long it was held
| Window | Funds | Short of stated | Median difference | Median distance | Median underlying volatility |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| One month | 424 | 317 of 424 | −1.3% | 2.1% | 46% |
| Three months | 389 | 322 of 389 | −6.2% | 7.0% | 51% |
| Six months | 331 | 281 of 331 | −12.8% | 14.6% | 48% |
| One year | 251 | 181 of 251 | −11.7% | 17.9% | 35% |
| Three years | 103 | 63 of 103 | −19.4% | 44.2% | 20% |
The same trade from more than one issuer, widest spread first
| On | Issuers | Underlying moved | Closest to stated | Furthest | Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MARA +2x | 2 | −11.1% | MARU +24.8 | MRAL -15.8 | 40.6% |
| AMD -2x | 3 | +6.4% | AMDS +12.7 | DAMD -27.7 | 40.4% |
| XRPR +2x | 3 | +23.9% | UXRP -12.7 | XRPK -47.8 | 35.1% |
| PLTR -2x | 2 | +28.9% | PLTD +24.8 | PLTZ -9.4 | 34.1% |
| AAL +2x | 2 | −8.4% | AIRL +16.7 | AALG -7.1 | 23.9% |
| ETHA +2x | 4 | +50.0% | ETHU +5.7 | ETHT +0.6 | 5.1% |
| RGTI +2x | 2 | −19.7% | RGTU -8.4 | RGTX -12.0 | 3.6% |
| SMR +2x | 2 | +11.8% | SMUP -23.7 | SMU -26.9 | 3.1% |
| SOFI +2x | 2 | +9.3% | SOFA -11.3 | SOFX -14.4 | 3.1% |
| IREN +2x | 2 | −13.1% | IREX -20.4 | IRE -23.5 | 3.1% |
| SNDK +2x | 2 | +5.5% | SNXX -42.5 | SNDU -45.4 | 2.8% |
| HOOD +2x | 4 | +40.1% | HODU -13.0 | HOOX -15.8 | 2.7% |
Erosion against the underlying’s volatility, three months
| Underlying volatility | Funds | Median volatility | Median difference from stated | Short of stated |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% to 30% | 111 | 18% | −1.7% | 73 of 111 |
| 30% to 50% | 70 | 41% | −5.7% | 63 of 70 |
| 50% to 80% | 105 | 61% | −9.3% | 89 of 105 |
| 80% and above | 103 | 93% | −20.4% | 97 of 103 |
Method. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation from Tiingo end-of-day prices with distributions reinvested, measured against the fund’s own underlying over exactly the same days. The stated multiple comes from the fund’s registered name; the underlying is mapped by hand and checked against the name the exchange gives it. Funds whose underlying has no investable tracker are listed on ETFIQ and excluded here, because there is nothing to measure them against. Data file: https://etfiq.com/data/leverage.json. Rebuilt every trading night. ETFIQ is an independent publisher and makes no recommendations. Standards