AMA vs. CIFG

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

AMA (Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF) and CIFG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AMA charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CIFG.

Performance

AMA vs. CIFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF (AMA) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF (CIFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

AMA

• 1D: -6.84%
• 1M: -11.50%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CIFG

• 1D: -21.93%
• 1M: -59.11%
• 6M: -46.89%
• YTD: -26.74%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMA vs. CIFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
AMA Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF	37.78%
CIFG Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF	-46.98%

Correlation

The correlation between AMA and CIFG is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2026	0.50

Return for Risk

AMA vs. CIFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF (AMA) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF (CIFG). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Drawdowns

AMA vs. CIFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMA drawdown since its inception was -42.98%, smaller than the maximum CIFG drawdown of -71.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMA and CIFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMA	CIFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.98%	-71.71%	+28.73%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-42.70%	-66.62%	+23.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.49%	-36.36%	+22.87%

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AMA	CIFG	Difference
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	182.25%	206.17%	-23.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	182.25%	206.17%	-23.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	182.25%	206.17%	-23.92%

AMA vs. CIFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMA has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than CIFG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

AMA vs. CIFG - Dividend Comparison

Neither AMA nor CIFG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMA and CIFG in my portfolio?

AMA and CIFG have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AMA or CIFG?

On fees, CIFG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMA or CIFG?

CIFG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for AMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMA or CIFG?

AMA and CIFG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between AMA and CIFG?

They also come from different issuers: Defiance and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.29% for AMA and 0.75% for CIFG.