CRMG vs. POWR
CRMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF) and POWR (iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CRMG is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Leverage Shares, while POWR is a Utilities Equities fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CRMG returned -60.55% vs 30.95% for POWR. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. CRMG charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for POWR.
Performance
CRMG vs. POWR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CRMG achieves a -56.09% return, which is significantly lower than POWR's 18.65% return.
CRMG
- 1D
- -1.95%
- 1M
- -1.95%
- YTD
- -56.09%
- 6M
- -50.25%
- 1Y
- -60.55%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
POWR
- 1D
- 0.11%
- 1M
- -1.35%
- YTD
- 18.65%
- 6M
- 14.89%
- 1Y
- 30.95%
- 3Y*
- 12.44%
- 5Y*
- 15.19%
- 10Y*
- 8.59%
CRMG vs. POWR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF | -56.09% | 3.69% |
POWR iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF | 18.65% | 17.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between CRMG and POWR is -0.16, 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 | -0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025 | -0.10 |
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
CRMG vs. POWR — Risk / Return Rank
CRMG
POWR
CRMG vs. POWR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG) and iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF (POWR). 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.
| CRMG | POWR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.86 | 1.32 | -0.46 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.86 | 5.20 | -6.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.47 | 13.06 | -14.53 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CRMG | POWR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.81 | 1.88 | -2.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.66 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.34 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.65 | 0.19 | -0.84 |
Drawdowns
CRMG vs. POWR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CRMG drawdown since its inception was -74.38%, which is greater than POWR's maximum drawdown of -65.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRMG and POWR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CRMG | POWR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -74.38% | -65.98% | -8.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -70.91% | -5.98% | -64.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.14% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.09% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -63.42% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -67.87% | -1.35% | -66.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -37.81% | -18.15% | -19.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 41.08% | 2.38% | +38.70% |
Volatility
CRMG vs. POWR - Volatility Comparison
Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG) has a higher volatility of 34.03% compared to iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF (POWR) at 5.77%. This indicates that CRMG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than POWR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CRMG | POWR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 34.03% | 5.77% | +28.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 63.87% | 12.34% | +51.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 75.31% | 16.63% | +58.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 75.62% | 23.08% | +52.54% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 75.62% | 25.61% | +50.01% |
CRMG vs. POWR - Expense Ratio Comparison
CRMG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than POWR's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
CRMG vs. POWR - Dividend Comparison
CRMG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while POWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.66%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
POWR iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF | 6.66% | 7.56% | 4.36% | 4.16% | 4.82% | 3.94% | 3.96% | 5.71% | 3.17% | 3.11% | 2.75% | 3.42% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CRMG and POWR have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CRMG has higher volatility (34.03%) compared to POWR (5.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRMG dropped -74.38% vs POWR's -65.98%.
On 1-year performance, POWR leads with 30.95% vs -60.55% for CRMG. On fees, POWR is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, POWR has been the lower-risk option at 5.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, POWR has performed better with a 30.95% return vs -60.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
POWR is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CRMG.
POWR has the higher dividend yield at 6.66%, compared with 0.00% for CRMG.
CRMG is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while POWR is Utilities Equities. They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CRMG and 0.40% for POWR.
POWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs -0.81), 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.
Find the right allocation for CRMG and POWR
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