GLWG vs. NBIG
GLWG (Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF) and NBIG (Leverage Shares 2X Long NBIS Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Leverage Shares. GLWG is passively managed, while NBIG is actively managed. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.
Performance
GLWG vs. NBIG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GLWG
- 1D
- 0.42%
- 1M
- 46.27%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBIG
- 1D
- -6.73%
- 1M
- 83.04%
- YTD
- 453.13%
- 6M
- 273.38%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GLWG vs. NBIG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
GLWG Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF | 85.97% |
NBIG Leverage Shares 2X Long NBIS Daily ETF | 413.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLWG and NBIG is 0.29, 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 | 0.29 |
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
GLWG vs. NBIG - 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 NBIS Daily ETF (NBIG). 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.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLWG | NBIG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 8.78 | 1.21 | +7.57 |
Drawdowns
GLWG vs. NBIG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLWG drawdown since its inception was -29.53%, smaller than the maximum NBIG drawdown of -75.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLWG and NBIG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLWG | NBIG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.53% | -75.83% | +46.30% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.32% | -9.57% | -0.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.71% | -43.08% | +32.37% |
Volatility
GLWG vs. NBIG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLWG | NBIG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 151.06% | 201.21% | -50.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 151.06% | 201.21% | -50.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 151.06% | 201.21% | -50.15% |
GLWG vs. NBIG - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GLWG and NBIG have an expense ratio of 0.75%.
Dividends
GLWG vs. NBIG - Dividend Comparison
Neither GLWG nor NBIG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
GLWG and NBIG have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GLWG and NBIG have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.
GLWG and NBIG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
Find the right allocation for GLWG and NBIG
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