CZA vs. MUU

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

CZA (Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF) and MUU (Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - CZA is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index, while MUU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Micron Technology, Inc. (200% Daily). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CZA returned 16.07% vs 3083.51% for MUU. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CZA charges 0.69%/yr vs 1.01%/yr for MUU.

Performance

CZA vs. MUU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CZA achieves a 11.54% return, which is significantly lower than MUU's 642.75% return.

CZA

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 2.58%
• 6M: 8.57%
• YTD: 11.54%
• 1Y: 16.07%
• 3Y*: 12.71%
• 5Y*: 7.69%
• 10Y*: 10.56%

MUU

• 1D: -2.52%
• 1M: -10.27%
• 6M: 421.21%
• YTD: 642.75%
• 1Y: 3,083.51%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CZA vs. MUU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF	11.54%	8.31%	-2.69%
MUU Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares	642.75%	599.03%	-40.91%

Correlation

The correlation between CZA and MUU is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2024	0.26

The correlation between CZA and MUU shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (1 year) to 0.26 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CZA vs. MUU — Risk / Return Rank

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

CZA

CZA Risk / Return Rank: 43
CZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
CZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
CZA Omega Ratio Rank: 40
CZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
CZA Martin Ratio Rank: 48

MUU

MUU Risk / Return Rank: 99
MUU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MUU Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
MUU Omega Ratio Rank: 97
MUU Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MUU Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

CZA vs. MUU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU). 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.

	CZA	MUU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.21	27.27	-26.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.83	5.80	-3.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.72	-0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.67	75.03	-73.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.43	245.78	-239.35

CZA vs. MUU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CZA Sharpe Ratio is 1.21, which is lower than the MUU Sharpe Ratio of 27.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CZA and MUU, 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

CZA vs. MUU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CZA drawdown since its inception was -53.20%, smaller than the maximum MUU drawdown of -75.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZA and MUU.

Drawdown Indicators

	CZA	MUU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.20%	-75.07%	+21.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.21%	-52.72%	+43.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.18%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-30.01%	+29.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.85%	-23.40%	+16.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.40%	16.41%	-14.01%

Volatility

CZA vs. MUU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) is 2.93%, while Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU) has a volatility of 67.23%. This indicates that CZA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MUU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CZA	MUU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.93%	67.23%	-64.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.33%	116.08%	-106.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.71%	145.04%	-132.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.12%	138.03%	-121.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.19%	138.03%	-118.84%

CZA vs. MUU - Expense Ratio Comparison

CZA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than MUU's 1.01% expense ratio.

Dividends

CZA vs. MUU - Dividend Comparison

CZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, more than MUU's 0.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF	1.40%	1.56%	1.27%	1.36%	1.71%	0.89%	1.42%	1.40%	1.27%	1.10%	1.87%	1.37%
MUU Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares	0.64%	4.27%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CZA and MUU in my portfolio?

CZA and MUU have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CZA or MUU?

MUU has higher volatility (67.23%) compared to CZA (2.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CZA dropped -53.20% vs MUU's -75.07%.

Which ETF is better, CZA or MUU?

On 1-year performance, MUU leads with 3083.51% vs 16.07% for CZA. On fees, CZA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CZA has been the lower-risk option at 2.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CZA or MUU?

Over the 1-year period, MUU has performed better with a 3083.51% return vs 16.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CZA or MUU?

CZA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for MUU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CZA or MUU?

CZA has the higher dividend yield at 1.40%, compared with 0.64% for MUU.

What is the main difference between CZA and MUU?

CZA is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while MUU is Leveraged Equities. CZA tracks Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index, while MUU tracks Micron Technology, Inc. (200% Daily). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CZA and 1.01% for MUU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MUU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (27.27 vs 1.21), 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.