LABU vs. CRWG
LABU (Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares) and CRWG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. LABU is passively managed, while CRWG is actively managed. Their 0.24 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. LABU charges 0.96%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CRWG.
Performance
LABU vs. CRWG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LABU achieves a 42.67% return, which is significantly higher than CRWG's -46.53% return.
LABU
- 1D
- -8.60%
- 1M
- -25.06%
- 6M
- 37.10%
- YTD
- 42.67%
- 1Y
- 272.05%
- 3Y*
- 25.64%
- 5Y*
- -26.71%
- 10Y*
- -12.33%
- ALL TIME*
- -20.62%
CRWG
- 1D
- -5.79%
- 1M
- -30.60%
- 6M
- -66.14%
- YTD
- -46.53%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $26.24M | $26.54M | $50.36M | |
| $76.19M | $116.75M | $118.31M |
LABU vs. CRWG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LABU Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares | 42.67% | 165.53% |
CRWG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF | -46.53% | -81.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between LABU and CRWG is 0.24, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 11, 2025 | 0.24 |
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. CRWG — Risk / Return Rank
LABU
CRWG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LABU vs. CRWG - 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 CRWV Daily ETF (CRWG). 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.
| LABU | CRWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.00 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.05 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LABU vs. CRWG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LABU drawdown since its inception was -99.18%, which is greater than CRWG's maximum drawdown of -94.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LABU and CRWG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LABU | CRWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.18% | -94.04% | -5.14% |
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 | -97.36% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -98.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.97% | -92.01% | -2.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -81.83% | -71.01% | -10.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.97% | — | — |
Volatility
LABU vs. CRWG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LABU | CRWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 24.69% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 63.73% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 80.28% | 192.54% | -112.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 96.01% | 192.54% | -96.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 95.22% | 192.54% | -97.32% |
LABU vs. CRWG - Expense Ratio Comparison
LABU has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than CRWG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
LABU vs. CRWG - Dividend Comparison
LABU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.45%, less than CRWG's 13.83% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CRWG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF | 13.83% | 7.39% | 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 | 0.45% | 0.84% | 0.35% | 0.35% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.28% | 0.64% | 0.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LABU and CRWG have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CRWG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CRWG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for LABU.
CRWG has the higher dividend yield at 13.83%, compared with 0.45% for LABU.
They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for LABU and 0.75% for CRWG.
Find the right allocation for LABU and CRWG
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