BZQ vs. CRMG

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

BZQ (ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped) and CRMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. BZQ is passively managed, while CRMG is actively managed. Over the past year, BZQ returned -49.00% vs -67.15% for CRMG. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. BZQ charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CRMG.

Performance

BZQ vs. CRMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped (BZQ) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BZQ achieves a -26.43% return, which is significantly higher than CRMG's -65.13% return.

BZQ

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -7.58%
• 6M: -19.82%
• YTD: -26.43%
• 1Y: -49.00%
• 3Y*: -22.06%
• 5Y*: -23.87%
• 10Y*: -34.47%

CRMG

• 1D: -2.25%
• 1M: 18.32%
• 6M: -51.86%
• YTD: -65.13%
• 1Y: -67.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BZQ vs. CRMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BZQ ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped	-26.43%	-41.65%
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF	-65.13%	-0.29%

Correlation

The correlation between BZQ and CRMG is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025	-0.06

Return for Risk

BZQ vs. CRMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

BZQ

BZQ Risk / Return Rank: 3
BZQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
BZQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
BZQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2
BZQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
BZQ Martin Ratio Rank: 4

CRMG

CRMG Risk / Return Rank: 2
CRMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CRMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
CRMG Omega Ratio Rank: 2
CRMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
CRMG Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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.

BZQ vs. CRMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped (BZQ) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). 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.

	BZQ	CRMG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.98	-0.86	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.53	-1.40	-0.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	0.84	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.75	-0.89	+0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.12	-1.47	+0.35

BZQ vs. CRMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BZQ Sharpe Ratio is -0.98, which is comparable to the CRMG Sharpe Ratio of -0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BZQ and CRMG, 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

BZQ vs. CRMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BZQ drawdown since its inception was -99.82%, which is greater than CRMG's maximum drawdown of -79.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BZQ and CRMG.

Drawdown Indicators

	BZQ	CRMG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.82%	-79.83%	-19.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-65.20%	-75.82%	+10.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-77.31%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-88.65%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-98.94%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.76%	-74.49%	-25.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-84.62%	-41.14%	-43.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	43.60%	45.60%	-2.00%

Volatility

BZQ vs. CRMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped (BZQ) is 11.93%, while Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG) has a volatility of 23.23%. This indicates that BZQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CRMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BZQ	CRMG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.93%	23.23%	-11.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.85%	64.26%	-24.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	49.98%	77.99%	-28.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	55.12%	75.67%	-20.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	66.56%	75.67%	-9.11%

BZQ vs. CRMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BZQ has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CRMG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

BZQ vs. CRMG - Dividend Comparison

BZQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.50%, while CRMG has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BZQ ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped	7.50%	5.96%	3.26%	4.51%	0.22%	0.00%	0.21%	2.13%	0.28%
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BZQ and CRMG in my portfolio?

BZQ and CRMG have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BZQ or CRMG?

CRMG has higher volatility (23.23%) compared to BZQ (11.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BZQ dropped -99.82% vs CRMG's -79.83%.

Which ETF is better, BZQ or CRMG?

On 1-year performance, BZQ leads with -49.00% vs -67.15% for CRMG. On fees, CRMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, BZQ has been the lower-risk option at 11.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BZQ or CRMG?

Over the 1-year period, BZQ has performed better with a -49.00% return vs -67.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BZQ or CRMG?

CRMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BZQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BZQ or CRMG?

BZQ has the higher dividend yield at 7.50%, compared with 0.00% for CRMG.

What is the main difference between BZQ and CRMG?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BZQ and 0.75% for CRMG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CRMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.86 vs -0.98), 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.