LABU vs. COTG
LABU (Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares) and COTG (Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. LABU is passively managed, while COTG is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. LABU charges 1.12%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for COTG.
Performance
LABU vs. COTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LABU achieves a 12.44% return, which is significantly lower than COTG's 20.04% return.
LABU
- 1D
- 8.32%
- 1M
- -4.23%
- YTD
- 12.44%
- 6M
- 8.50%
- 1Y
- 218.84%
- 3Y*
- 10.35%
- 5Y*
- -31.68%
- 10Y*
- -13.53%
COTG
- 1D
- 2.32%
- 1M
- -9.84%
- YTD
- 20.04%
- 6M
- 10.13%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LABU vs. COTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LABU Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares | 12.44% | 89.00% |
COTG Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF | 20.04% | -21.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between LABU and COTG is -0.11, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2025 | -0.11 |
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
LABU vs. COTG — Risk / Return Rank
LABU
COTG
LABU vs. COTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares (LABU) and Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF (COTG). 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.
| LABU | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.18 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.89 | — | — |
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
| LABU | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.89 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.33 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.14 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.23 | -0.21 | -0.02 |
Drawdowns
LABU vs. COTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LABU drawdown since its inception was -99.18%, which is greater than COTG's maximum drawdown of -25.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LABU and COTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LABU | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.18% | -25.69% | -73.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.70% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -78.30% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -97.59% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -98.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -96.04% | -21.71% | -74.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -81.68% | -8.42% | -73.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.53% | — | — |
Volatility
LABU vs. COTG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LABU | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 29.11% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 60.11% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 76.24% | 40.63% | +35.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 95.65% | 40.63% | +55.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 95.44% | 40.63% | +54.81% |
LABU vs. COTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
LABU has a 1.12% expense ratio, which is higher than COTG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
LABU vs. COTG - Dividend Comparison
LABU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.69%, while COTG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COTG Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LABU Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares | 0.69% | 0.84% | 0.35% | 0.35% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.28% | 0.64% | 0.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LABU and COTG have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, COTG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
COTG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.12% for LABU.
LABU has the higher dividend yield at 0.69%, compared with 0.00% for COTG.
They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.12% for LABU and 0.75% for COTG.
Find the right allocation for LABU and COTG
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