LULG vs. CMDY
LULG (Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF) and CMDY (iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LULG is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Leverage Shares, while CMDY is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. LULG is actively managed, while CMDY is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.21, they often move in opposite directions. LULG charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for CMDY.
Performance
LULG vs. CMDY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LULG achieves a -74.12% return, which is significantly lower than CMDY's 20.31% return.
LULG
- 1D
- -4.15%
- 1M
- 5.15%
- 6M
- -72.37%
- YTD
- -74.12%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CMDY
- 1D
- 1.17%
- 1M
- 2.84%
- 6M
- 15.98%
- YTD
- 20.31%
- 1Y
- 28.27%
- 3Y*
- 12.28%
- 5Y*
- 9.80%
- 10Y*
- —
LULG vs. CMDY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LULG Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF | -74.12% | 55.59% |
CMDY iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF | 20.31% | 2.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between LULG and CMDY is -0.21, 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 Nov 5, 2025 | -0.21 |
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
LULG vs. CMDY — Risk / Return Rank
LULG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CMDY
LULG vs. CMDY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF (LULG) and iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY). 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.
| LULG | CMDY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.30 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.00 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.61 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LULG vs. CMDY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LULG drawdown since its inception was -79.88%, which is greater than CMDY's maximum drawdown of -31.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LULG and CMDY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LULG | CMDY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.88% | -31.19% | -48.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -14.23% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.23% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.56% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -76.03% | -7.90% | -68.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -40.53% | -13.10% | -27.43% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 4.28% | — |
Volatility
LULG vs. CMDY - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LULG | CMDY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.74% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 14.40% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 86.79% | 16.57% | +70.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 86.79% | 15.83% | +70.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 86.79% | 14.65% | +72.14% |
LULG vs. CMDY - Expense Ratio Comparison
LULG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CMDY's 0.28% expense ratio.
Dividends
LULG vs. CMDY - Dividend Comparison
LULG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CMDY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.72%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDY iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF | 10.72% | 12.89% | 4.23% | 5.10% | 3.98% | 16.09% | 0.15% | 2.21% | 1.73% |
LULG Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LULG and CMDY have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CMDY is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CMDY is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LULG.
CMDY has the higher dividend yield at 10.72%, compared with 0.00% for LULG.
LULG is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while CMDY is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LULG and 0.28% for CMDY.
Find the right allocation for LULG and CMDY
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