PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CIFU vs. SATG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CIFU vs. SATG - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIFU achieves a 94.41% return, which is significantly higher than SATG's -29.37% return.


CIFU

1D
-4.06%
1M
42.63%
YTD
94.41%
6M
64.26%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

SATG

1D
-4.82%
1M
-34.82%
YTD
-29.37%
6M
-27.06%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CIFU vs. SATG - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CIFU and SATG is 0.29, 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 Dec 16, 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. SATG - 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 SATS Daily ETF (SATG). 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.


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

CIFU vs. SATG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CIFU vs. SATG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIFU drawdown since its inception was -77.20%, which is greater than SATG's maximum drawdown of -50.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIFU and SATG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CIFUSATGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-77.20%

-50.77%

-26.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.48%

-50.77%

+40.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-42.93%

-21.97%

-20.96%

Volatility

CIFU vs. SATG - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CIFUSATGDifference

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

207.07%

119.31%

+87.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

207.07%

119.31%

+87.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

207.07%

119.31%

+87.76%

CIFU vs. SATG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIFU has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than SATG's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

CIFU vs. SATG - Dividend Comparison

Neither CIFU nor SATG has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CIFU and SATG 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, SATG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

CIFU and SATG 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 SATG.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CIFU and SATG

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