BULZ vs. SMST

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

BULZ (MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs) and SMST (Defiance Daily Target 2X Short MSTR ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BULZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%), while SMST is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by Defiance. BULZ is passively managed, while SMST is actively managed. Over the past year, BULZ returned 98.38% vs 240.03% for SMST. At a correlation of -0.52, they often move in opposite directions. BULZ charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.29%/yr for SMST.

Performance

BULZ vs. SMST - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) and Defiance Daily Target 2X Short MSTR ETF (SMST). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BULZ achieves a 38.16% return, which is significantly higher than SMST's -27.96% return.

BULZ

• 1D: -7.41%
• 1M: -10.84%
• 6M: 28.00%
• YTD: 38.16%
• 1Y: 98.38%
• 3Y*: 65.65%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SMST

• 1D: 5.26%
• 1M: 44.38%
• 6M: -15.07%
• YTD: -27.96%
• 1Y: 240.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BULZ vs. SMST - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs	38.16%	60.09%	13.62%
SMST Defiance Daily Target 2X Short MSTR ETF	-27.96%	-44.36%	-91.71%

Correlation

The correlation between BULZ and SMST is -0.53, 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	-0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2024	-0.52

The correlation between BULZ and SMST has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.53 to -0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BULZ vs. SMST — Risk / Return Rank

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

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 42
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 44
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 37

SMST

SMST Risk / Return Rank: 60
SMST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
SMST Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
SMST Omega Ratio Rank: 63
SMST Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
SMST Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

BULZ vs. SMST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) and Defiance Daily Target 2X Short MSTR ETF (SMST). 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.

	BULZ	SMST	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.22	1.62	-0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	2.33	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.30	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.82	2.83	-1.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.44	5.47	-1.04

BULZ vs. SMST - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BULZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is comparable to the SMST Sharpe Ratio of 1.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BULZ and SMST, 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

BULZ vs. SMST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BULZ drawdown since its inception was -94.44%, roughly equal to the maximum SMST drawdown of -99.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BULZ and SMST.

Drawdown Indicators

	BULZ	SMST	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.44%	-99.25%	+4.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-54.22%	-85.39%	+31.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-67.96%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-34.91%	-97.17%	+62.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-57.75%	-90.89%	+33.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	22.26%	44.09%	-21.83%

Volatility

BULZ vs. SMST - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) is 29.07%, while Defiance Daily Target 2X Short MSTR ETF (SMST) has a volatility of 56.59%. This indicates that BULZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BULZ	SMST	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	29.07%	56.59%	-27.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	65.30%	135.88%	-70.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	81.12%	149.23%	-68.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	91.70%	167.74%	-76.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	91.70%	167.74%	-76.04%

BULZ vs. SMST - Expense Ratio Comparison

BULZ has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than SMST's 1.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

BULZ vs. SMST - Dividend Comparison

Neither BULZ nor SMST has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BULZ and SMST in my portfolio?

BULZ and SMST have a correlation of -0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BULZ or SMST?

SMST has higher volatility (56.59%) compared to BULZ (29.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BULZ dropped -94.44% vs SMST's -99.25%.

Which ETF is better, BULZ or SMST?

On 1-year performance, SMST leads with 240.03% vs 98.38% for BULZ. On fees, BULZ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, BULZ has been the lower-risk option at 29.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BULZ or SMST?

Over the 1-year period, SMST has performed better with a 240.03% return vs 98.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BULZ or SMST?

BULZ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for SMST.

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

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

What is the main difference between BULZ and SMST?

BULZ is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while SMST is Inverse Equities. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Defiance. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BULZ and 1.29% for SMST.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMST currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.62 vs 1.22), 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.