INFH vs. GLWG
INFH (Tidal Trust II - Defiance Daily Target 2X Long INFQ ETF) and GLWG (Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. INFH is actively managed, while GLWG is passively managed. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INFH charges 1.31%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GLWG.
Performance
INFH vs. GLWG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
INFH
- 1D
- -17.96%
- 1M
- -59.76%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GLWG
- 1D
- -18.25%
- 1M
- -29.91%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
INFH vs. GLWG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
INFH Tidal Trust II - Defiance Daily Target 2X Long INFQ ETF | -74.38% |
GLWG Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF | -45.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between INFH and GLWG is 0.34, 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 Jun 5, 2026 | 0.34 |
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
INFH vs. GLWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tidal Trust II - Defiance Daily Target 2X Long INFQ ETF (INFH) and Leverage Shares 2X Long GLW Daily ETF (GLWG). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
INFH vs. GLWG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INFH drawdown since its inception was -74.38%, which is greater than GLWG's maximum drawdown of -64.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INFH and GLWG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INFH | GLWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -74.38% | -64.27% | -10.11% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -74.38% | -64.27% | -10.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.87% | -17.12% | -24.75% |
Volatility
INFH vs. GLWG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| INFH | GLWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 198.78% | 177.32% | +21.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 198.78% | 177.32% | +21.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 198.78% | 177.32% | +21.46% |
INFH vs. GLWG - Expense Ratio Comparison
INFH has a 1.31% expense ratio, which is higher than GLWG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
INFH vs. GLWG - Dividend Comparison
Neither INFH nor GLWG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
INFH and GLWG have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GLWG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GLWG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.31% for INFH.
INFH and GLWG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Defiance and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.31% for INFH and 0.75% for GLWG.
Find the right allocation for INFH and GLWG
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