BLSG vs. CIFU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BLSG (Leverage Shares 2X Long BLSH Daily ETF) and CIFU (T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BLSG charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for CIFU.

Performance

BLSG vs. CIFU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 2X Long BLSH Daily ETF (BLSG) and T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF (CIFU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLSG achieves a -58.79% return, which is significantly lower than CIFU's 90.91% return.

BLSG

• 1D: -15.77%
• 1M: -55.27%
• YTD: -58.79%
• 6M: -73.27%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CIFU

• 1D: 0.89%
• 1M: 94.18%
• YTD: 90.91%
• 6M: 10.06%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BLSG vs. CIFU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BLSG Leverage Shares 2X Long BLSH Daily ETF	-58.79%	-8.87%
CIFU T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF	90.91%	-6.67%

Correlation

The correlation between BLSG and CIFU is 0.49, 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 Nov 24, 2025	0.49

Return for Risk

BLSG vs. CIFU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long BLSH Daily ETF (BLSG) and T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF (CIFU). 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.

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

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BLSG	CIFU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.66	0.99	-1.65

Drawdowns

BLSG vs. CIFU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLSG drawdown since its inception was -83.67%, which is greater than CIFU's maximum drawdown of -77.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLSG and CIFU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLSG	CIFU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.67%	-77.20%	-6.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-83.52%	-9.09%	-74.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-60.12%	-45.35%	-14.77%

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BLSG	CIFU	Difference
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	145.44%	206.19%	-60.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	145.44%	206.19%	-60.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	145.44%	206.19%	-60.75%

BLSG vs. CIFU - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLSG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than CIFU's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BLSG vs. CIFU - Dividend Comparison

Neither BLSG nor CIFU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BLSG and CIFU in my portfolio?

BLSG and CIFU have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BLSG or CIFU?

On fees, BLSG 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, BLSG or CIFU?

BLSG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for CIFU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BLSG or CIFU?

BLSG and CIFU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BLSG and CIFU?

They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for BLSG and 1.50% for CIFU.