CIFU vs. ADBG
CIFU (T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF) and ADBG (Leverage Shares 2X Long ADBE Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.29, they often move in opposite directions. CIFU charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for ADBG.
Performance
CIFU vs. ADBG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIFU achieves a -26.03% return, which is significantly higher than ADBG's -62.04% return.
CIFU
- 1D
- -20.66%
- 1M
- -58.62%
- 6M
- -45.17%
- YTD
- -26.03%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ADBG
- 1D
- 9.60%
- 1M
- 25.57%
- 6M
- -49.08%
- YTD
- -62.04%
- 1Y
- -67.64%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CIFU vs. ADBG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CIFU T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF | -26.03% | -13.41% |
ADBG Leverage Shares 2X Long ADBE Daily ETF | -62.04% | 23.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIFU and ADBG is -0.29, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2025 | -0.29 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CIFU vs. ADBG — Risk / Return Rank
CIFU
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ADBG
CIFU vs. ADBG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF (CIFU) and Leverage Shares 2X Long ADBE Daily ETF (ADBG). 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.
| CIFU | ADBG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 0.81 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.86 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -1.46 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CIFU vs. ADBG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIFU drawdown since its inception was -77.20%, smaller than the maximum ADBG drawdown of -84.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIFU and ADBG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIFU | ADBG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -77.20% | -84.14% | +6.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -78.97% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -65.94% | -76.95% | +11.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -42.91% | -44.86% | +1.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 46.32% | — |
Volatility
CIFU vs. ADBG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CIFU | ADBG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 23.90% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 61.43% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 206.70% | 71.84% | +134.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 206.70% | 69.74% | +136.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 206.70% | 69.74% | +136.96% |
CIFU vs. ADBG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIFU has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than ADBG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIFU vs. ADBG - Dividend Comparison
Neither CIFU nor ADBG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CIFU and ADBG have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ADBG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ADBG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for CIFU.
CIFU and ADBG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: REX and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for CIFU and 0.75% for ADBG.
Find the right allocation for CIFU and ADBG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer