CRWG vs. LABU
CRWG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF) and LABU (Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares) are both Leveraged Equities funds. CRWG is actively managed, while LABU is passively managed. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CRWG charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.12%/yr for LABU.
Performance
CRWG vs. LABU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CRWG achieves a 34.43% return, which is significantly lower than LABU's 47.57% return.
CRWG
- 1D
- -9.65%
- 1M
- -6.23%
- YTD
- 34.43%
- 6M
- 5.63%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LABU
- 1D
- 2.26%
- 1M
- 34.26%
- YTD
- 47.57%
- 6M
- 36.98%
- 1Y
- 324.35%
- 3Y*
- 23.36%
- 5Y*
- -31.01%
- 10Y*
- -7.18%
CRWG vs. LABU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CRWG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF | 34.43% | -81.81% |
LABU Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares | 47.57% | 165.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between CRWG and LABU is 0.24, 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 Aug 11, 2025 | 0.24 |
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
CRWG vs. LABU — Risk / Return Rank
CRWG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LABU
CRWG vs. LABU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF (CRWG) and Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares (LABU). 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.
| CRWG | LABU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.44 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 10.64 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 29.90 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CRWG vs. LABU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CRWG drawdown since its inception was -89.42%, smaller than the maximum LABU drawdown of -99.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRWG and LABU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CRWG | LABU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.42% | -99.18% | +9.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -30.70% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -78.30% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -97.59% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -98.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -79.92% | -94.80% | +14.88% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -68.87% | -81.72% | +12.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 10.91% | — |
Volatility
CRWG vs. LABU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CRWG | LABU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 29.76% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 63.07% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 189.35% | 78.78% | +110.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 189.35% | 95.94% | +93.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 189.35% | 95.44% | +93.91% |
CRWG vs. LABU - Expense Ratio Comparison
CRWG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than LABU's 1.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
CRWG vs. LABU - Dividend Comparison
CRWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.50%, more than LABU's 0.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CRWG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF | 5.50% | 7.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LABU Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares | 0.52% | 0.84% | 0.35% | 0.35% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.28% | 0.64% | 0.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CRWG and LABU have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CRWG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CRWG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.12% for LABU.
CRWG has the higher dividend yield at 5.50%, compared with 0.52% for LABU.
They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CRWG and 1.12% for LABU.
Find the right allocation for CRWG and LABU
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