EFZ vs. MUD

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

EFZ (ProShares Short MSCI EAFE) and MUD (Direxion Daily MU Bear 1X Shares) are both Inverse Equities funds. EFZ is passively managed, while MUD is actively managed. Over the past year, EFZ returned -17.18% vs -93.60% for MUD. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EFZ charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for MUD.

Performance

EFZ vs. MUD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short MSCI EAFE (EFZ) and Direxion Daily MU Bear 1X Shares (MUD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFZ achieves a -8.77% return, which is significantly higher than MUD's -83.10% return.

EFZ

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: -1.95%
• YTD: -8.77%
• 6M: -9.09%
• 1Y: -17.18%
• 3Y*: -10.58%
• 5Y*: -6.10%
• 10Y*: -9.00%

MUD

• 1D: -6.93%
• 1M: -44.97%
• YTD: -83.10%
• 6M: -83.63%
• 1Y: -93.60%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EFZ vs. MUD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EFZ ProShares Short MSCI EAFE	-8.77%	-20.92%	8.36%
MUD Direxion Daily MU Bear 1X Shares	-83.10%	-78.75%	19.12%

Correlation

The correlation between EFZ and MUD is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2024	0.40

Return for Risk

EFZ vs. MUD — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFZ

EFZ Risk / Return Rank: 1
EFZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
EFZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
EFZ Omega Ratio Rank: 2
EFZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
EFZ Martin Ratio Rank: 0

MUD

MUD Risk / Return Rank: 0
MUD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
MUD Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
MUD Omega Ratio Rank: 0
MUD Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
MUD Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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.

EFZ vs. MUD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short MSCI EAFE (EFZ) and Direxion Daily MU Bear 1X Shares (MUD). 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.

	EFZ	MUD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.03	-1.32	+0.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.43	-4.06	+2.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.84	0.56	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-1.01	-0.99	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.71	-1.46	-0.25

EFZ vs. MUD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFZ Sharpe Ratio is -1.03, which is comparable to the MUD Sharpe Ratio of -1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFZ and MUD, 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

EFZ vs. MUD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFZ drawdown since its inception was -88.08%, smaller than the maximum MUD drawdown of -96.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFZ and MUD.

Drawdown Indicators

	EFZ	MUD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.08%	-96.89%	+8.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.09%	-94.52%	+77.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.77%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.88%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-88.05%	-96.89%	+8.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-67.12%	-51.50%	-15.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.31%	64.02%	-53.71%

Volatility

EFZ vs. MUD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Short MSCI EAFE (EFZ) is 5.00%, while Direxion Daily MU Bear 1X Shares (MUD) has a volatility of 35.25%. This indicates that EFZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MUD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EFZ	MUD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.00%	35.25%	-30.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.99%	61.23%	-47.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.73%	71.36%	-54.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.82%	69.34%	-52.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.36%	69.34%	-51.98%

EFZ vs. MUD - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFZ has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than MUD's 0.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

EFZ vs. MUD - Dividend Comparison

EFZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, less than MUD's 34.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EFZ ProShares Short MSCI EAFE	4.12%	4.55%	5.29%	4.66%	0.57%	0.00%	0.04%	1.56%	0.34%
MUD Direxion Daily MU Bear 1X Shares	34.86%	9.21%	0.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EFZ and MUD in my portfolio?

EFZ and MUD have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EFZ or MUD?

MUD has higher volatility (35.25%) compared to EFZ (5.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFZ dropped -88.08% vs MUD's -96.89%.

Which ETF is better, EFZ or MUD?

On 1-year performance, EFZ leads with -17.18% vs -93.60% for MUD. On fees, EFZ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, EFZ has been the lower-risk option at 5.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EFZ or MUD?

Over the 1-year period, EFZ has performed better with a -17.18% return vs -93.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EFZ or MUD?

EFZ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for MUD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EFZ or MUD?

MUD has the higher dividend yield at 34.86%, compared with 4.12% for EFZ.

What is the main difference between EFZ and MUD?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for EFZ and 0.97% for MUD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.03 vs -1.32), 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.