CEFD vs. MSTZ

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) and MSTZ (T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while MSTZ is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by REX. CEFD is passively managed, while MSTZ is actively managed. Over the past year, CEFD returned 14.45% vs 282.56% for MSTZ. At a correlation of -0.37, they often move in opposite directions. CEFD charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for MSTZ.

Performance

CEFD vs. MSTZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEFD achieves a 7.74% return, which is significantly higher than MSTZ's -23.27% return.

CEFD

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 1.92%
• 6M: 5.77%
• YTD: 7.74%
• 1Y: 14.45%
• 3Y*: 14.60%
• 5Y*: 3.04%
• 10Y*: —

MSTZ

• 1D: 5.07%
• 1M: 46.38%
• 6M: -9.68%
• YTD: -23.27%
• 1Y: 282.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CEFD vs. MSTZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	7.74%	14.15%	0.13%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	-23.27%	-38.95%	-94.43%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFD and MSTZ is -0.43, 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	-0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2024	-0.37

Return for Risk

CEFD vs. MSTZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFD

CEFD Risk / Return Rank: 37
CEFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
CEFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
CEFD Omega Ratio Rank: 40
CEFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
CEFD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

MSTZ

MSTZ Risk / Return Rank: 68
MSTZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
MSTZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
MSTZ Omega Ratio Rank: 68
MSTZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
MSTZ Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

CEFD vs. MSTZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). 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.

	CEFD	MSTZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	1.92	-0.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	2.45	-0.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.32	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.16	3.35	-2.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.30	6.53	-1.23

CEFD vs. MSTZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFD Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is lower than the MSTZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFD and MSTZ, 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

CEFD vs. MSTZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFD drawdown since its inception was -36.95%, smaller than the maximum MSTZ drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFD and MSTZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEFD	MSTZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.95%	-99.38%	+62.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.51%	-84.89%	+72.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.33%	-97.39%	+96.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.54%	-94.53%	+82.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.73%	43.51%	-40.78%

Volatility

CEFD vs. MSTZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) is 4.05%, while T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ) has a volatility of 56.56%. This indicates that CEFD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CEFD	MSTZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.05%	56.56%	-52.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.98%	135.11%	-123.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.48%	148.53%	-135.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.03%	171.02%	-152.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.27%	171.02%	-153.75%

CEFD vs. MSTZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTZ's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFD vs. MSTZ - Dividend Comparison

CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.54%, while MSTZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	14.54%	14.88%	13.90%	14.76%	16.56%	10.31%	5.37%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEFD and MSTZ in my portfolio?

CEFD and MSTZ have a correlation of -0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CEFD or MSTZ?

MSTZ has higher volatility (56.56%) compared to CEFD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFD dropped -36.95% vs MSTZ's -99.38%.

Which ETF is better, CEFD or MSTZ?

On 1-year performance, MSTZ leads with 282.56% vs 14.45% for CEFD. On fees, CEFD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, CEFD has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CEFD or MSTZ?

Over the 1-year period, MSTZ has performed better with a 282.56% return vs 14.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEFD or MSTZ?

CEFD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for MSTZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CEFD or MSTZ?

CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.54%, compared with 0.00% for MSTZ.

What is the main difference between CEFD and MSTZ?

They also come from different issuers: UBS and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for CEFD and 1.05% for MSTZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSTZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.08), 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.