EDZ vs. MUU
EDZ (Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bear 3X Shares) and MUU (Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Direxion. EDZ is passively managed, while MUU is actively managed. Over the past year, EDZ returned -74.18% vs 5396.82% for MUU. At a correlation of -0.55, they often move in opposite directions. EDZ charges 1.08%/yr vs 1.06%/yr for MUU.
Performance
EDZ vs. MUU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EDZ achieves a -56.25% return, which is significantly lower than MUU's 798.37% return.
EDZ
- 1D
- 3.62%
- 1M
- -18.11%
- YTD
- -56.25%
- 6M
- -58.86%
- 1Y
- -74.18%
- 3Y*
- -48.04%
- 5Y*
- -24.82%
- 10Y*
- -36.41%
MUU
- 1D
- -15.35%
- 1M
- 121.05%
- YTD
- 798.37%
- 6M
- 1,279.44%
- 1Y
- 5,396.82%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EDZ vs. MUU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
EDZ Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bear 3X Shares | -56.25% | -59.30% | 27.77% |
MUU Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares | 798.37% | 599.03% | -43.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between EDZ and MUU is -0.57, 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 | -0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2024 | -0.55 |
The correlation between EDZ and MUU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.57 to -0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
EDZ vs. MUU — Risk / Return Rank
EDZ
MUU
EDZ vs. MUU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bear 3X Shares (EDZ) 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.
| EDZ | MUU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -42.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -9.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.70 | 1.86 | -1.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.98 | 104.05 | -105.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.68 | 352.22 | -353.90 |
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
| EDZ | MUU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.25 | 41.32 | -42.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.44 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.60 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.60 | 5.91 | -6.51 |
Drawdowns
EDZ vs. MUU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EDZ drawdown since its inception was -99.99%, which is greater than MUU's maximum drawdown of -75.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDZ and MUU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EDZ | MUU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.99% | -75.07% | -24.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -75.74% | -52.72% | -23.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -89.69% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -92.33% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.11% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.99% | -15.35% | -84.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -97.73% | -23.42% | -74.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 44.50% | 15.54% | +28.96% |
Volatility
EDZ vs. MUU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bear 3X Shares (EDZ) is 25.57%, while Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU) has a volatility of 56.84%. This indicates that EDZ 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EDZ | MUU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 25.57% | 56.84% | -31.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 51.95% | 106.70% | -54.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 59.51% | 132.77% | -73.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 57.00% | 134.14% | -77.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 60.97% | 134.14% | -73.17% |
EDZ vs. MUU - Expense Ratio Comparison
EDZ has a 1.08% expense ratio, which is higher than MUU's 1.06% expense ratio.
Dividends
EDZ vs. MUU - Dividend Comparison
EDZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.10%, more than MUU's 0.54% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDZ Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bear 3X Shares | 10.10% | 6.58% | 4.87% | 4.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.82% | 1.67% | 0.68% |
MUU Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares | 0.54% | 4.27% | 0.31% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EDZ and MUU have a correlation of -0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MUU has higher volatility (56.84%) compared to EDZ (25.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDZ dropped -99.99% vs MUU's -75.07%.
On 1-year performance, MUU leads with 5396.82% vs -74.18% for EDZ. On fees, MUU is cheaper at 1.06% per year. On volatility, EDZ has been the lower-risk option at 25.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MUU has performed better with a 5396.82% return vs -74.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MUU is cheaper with a 1.06% expense ratio, compared with 1.08% for EDZ.
EDZ has the higher dividend yield at 10.10%, compared with 0.54% for MUU.
Their fees differ too: 1.08% for EDZ and 1.06% for MUU.
MUU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (41.32 vs -1.25), 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 EDZ and MUU
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