AMA vs. FUTG
AMA (Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF) and FUTG (Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AMA charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FUTG.
Performance
AMA vs. FUTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
AMA
- 1D
- 8.42%
- 1M
- 136.44%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FUTG
- 1D
- -7.27%
- 1M
- -21.56%
- YTD
- -77.42%
- 6M
- -77.68%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AMA vs. FUTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
AMA Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF | 140.44% |
FUTG Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF | 4.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMA and FUTG is 0.31, 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 | 0.31 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AMA vs. FUTG - 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 FUTU Daily ETF (FUTG). 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.
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AMA vs. FUTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMA drawdown since its inception was -19.35%, smaller than the maximum FUTG drawdown of -86.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMA and FUTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMA | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.35% | -86.19% | +66.84% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -85.51% | +85.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.68% | -44.59% | +40.91% |
Volatility
AMA vs. FUTG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMA | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 181.63% | 130.44% | +51.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 181.63% | 130.44% | +51.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 181.63% | 130.44% | +51.19% |
AMA vs. FUTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMA has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than FUTG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
AMA vs. FUTG - Dividend Comparison
Neither AMA nor FUTG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
AMA and FUTG have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FUTG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FUTG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for AMA.
AMA and FUTG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Defiance and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.29% for AMA and 0.75% for FUTG.
Find the right allocation for AMA and FUTG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer