BERZ vs. BULZ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BERZ (MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and BULZ (MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both exchange-traded funds - BERZ is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index, while BULZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BERZ returned -75.61%/yr vs 82.14%/yr for BULZ. At a correlation of -1.00, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

BERZ vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BERZ achieves a -60.32% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 61.20% return.

BERZ

• 1D: 2.65%
• 1M: -6.29%
• YTD: -60.32%
• 6M: -58.94%
• 1Y: -83.28%
• 3Y*: -75.61%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BULZ

• 1D: -2.95%
• 1M: -4.19%
• YTD: 61.20%
• 6M: 55.42%
• 1Y: 175.88%
• 3Y*: 82.14%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BERZ vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BERZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-60.32%	-78.81%	-65.95%	-89.12%	102.85%	-28.36%
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs	61.20%	60.09%	54.09%	394.22%	-92.26%	9.17%

Correlation

The correlation between BERZ and BULZ is -0.99, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.00
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-1.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2021	-1.00

The correlation between BERZ and BULZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -1.00 to -0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

BERZ vs. BULZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BERZ	BULZ
Technology	60.8%	60.8%
Communication Services	26.2%	26.2%
Financial Services	13.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	13.0%	13.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BERZ vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BERZ

BERZ Risk / Return Rank: 1
BERZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
BERZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
BERZ Omega Ratio Rank: 0
BERZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
BERZ Martin Ratio Rank: 1

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 59
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 54
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 51

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BERZ vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ). 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.

	BERZ	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.04	2.24	-3.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.48	2.44	-4.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.74	1.32	-0.58
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.97	3.26	-4.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.54	8.46	-10.00

BERZ vs. BULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BERZ Sharpe Ratio is -1.04, which is lower than the BULZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BERZ and BULZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BERZ vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BERZ drawdown since its inception was -99.80%, which is greater than BULZ's maximum drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BERZ and BULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BERZ	BULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.80%	-94.44%	-5.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-85.55%	-54.22%	-31.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-98.87%	-67.96%	-30.91%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.76%	-24.05%	-75.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-71.79%	-58.04%	-13.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	55.40%	20.87%	+34.53%

Volatility

BERZ vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) have volatilities of 32.14% and 33.09%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BERZ	BULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	32.14%	33.09%	-0.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	63.10%	62.60%	+0.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	80.60%	79.22%	+1.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	92.68%	91.72%	+0.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	92.68%	91.72%	+0.96%

BERZ vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BERZ and BULZ have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

BERZ vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison

Neither BERZ nor BULZ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BERZ and BULZ in my portfolio?

BERZ and BULZ have a correlation of -0.99, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BERZ or BULZ?

BULZ has higher volatility (33.09%) compared to BERZ (32.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BERZ dropped -99.80% vs BULZ's -94.44%.

Which ETF is better, BERZ or BULZ?

On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 82.14% vs -75.61% for BERZ. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, BERZ has been the lower-risk option at 32.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BERZ or BULZ?

Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 82.14% return vs -75.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BERZ or BULZ?

BERZ and BULZ have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BERZ or BULZ?

BERZ and BULZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BERZ and BULZ?

BERZ is categorized as Inverse Equities, while BULZ is Leveraged Equities. BERZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation Index, while BULZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BULZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs -1.04), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.