GLWG vs. BMNG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GLWG (Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF) and BMNG (Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Leverage Shares. GLWG is passively managed, while BMNG is actively managed. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

GLWG vs. BMNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF (GLWG) and Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF (BMNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

GLWG

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 46.27%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BMNG

• 1D: -12.21%
• 1M: -48.30%
• YTD: -75.13%
• 6M: -85.16%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GLWG vs. BMNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
GLWG Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF	85.97%
BMNG Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF	-44.30%

Correlation

The correlation between GLWG and BMNG is 0.30, 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 Mar 11, 2026	0.30

Return for Risk

GLWG vs. BMNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF (GLWG) and Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF (BMNG). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GLWG	BMNG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	8.78	-0.52	+9.30

Drawdowns

GLWG vs. BMNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLWG drawdown since its inception was -29.53%, smaller than the maximum BMNG drawdown of -95.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLWG and BMNG.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLWG	BMNG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.53%	-95.36%	+65.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.32%	-95.36%	+85.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.71%	-81.38%	+70.67%

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GLWG	BMNG	Difference
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	151.06%	191.58%	-40.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	151.06%	191.58%	-40.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	151.06%	191.58%	-40.52%

GLWG vs. BMNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both GLWG and BMNG have an expense ratio of 0.75%.

Dividends

GLWG vs. BMNG - Dividend Comparison

Neither GLWG nor BMNG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLWG and BMNG in my portfolio?

GLWG and BMNG have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GLWG or BMNG?

Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLWG or BMNG?

GLWG and BMNG have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLWG or BMNG?

GLWG and BMNG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.