NODE vs. CIFU
NODE (VanEck Onchain Economy ETF) and CIFU (T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NODE is a Blockchain fund actively managed by VanEck, while CIFU is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by REX. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NODE charges 0.69%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for CIFU.
Performance
NODE vs. CIFU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NODE achieves a 33.28% return, which is significantly lower than CIFU's 90.91% return.
NODE
- 1D
- -1.79%
- 1M
- 10.04%
- YTD
- 33.28%
- 6M
- 21.22%
- 1Y
- 71.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CIFU
- 1D
- 0.89%
- 1M
- 94.18%
- YTD
- 90.91%
- 6M
- 10.06%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NODE vs. CIFU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NODE VanEck Onchain Economy ETF | 33.28% | 2.94% |
CIFU T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF | 90.91% | -6.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between NODE and CIFU is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 24, 2025 | 0.85 |
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
NODE vs. CIFU — Risk / Return Rank
NODE
CIFU
NODE vs. CIFU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Onchain Economy ETF (NODE) and T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF (CIFU). 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.
| NODE | CIFU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.04 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.50 | — | — |
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
| NODE | CIFU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.59 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.62 | 0.99 | +0.63 |
Drawdowns
NODE vs. CIFU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NODE drawdown since its inception was -35.35%, smaller than the maximum CIFU drawdown of -77.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NODE and CIFU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NODE | CIFU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.35% | -77.20% | +41.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.35% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.42% | -9.09% | +6.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.30% | -45.35% | +34.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.00% | — | — |
Volatility
NODE vs. CIFU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NODE | CIFU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.39% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 34.83% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 45.44% | 206.19% | -160.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 44.59% | 206.19% | -161.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.59% | 206.19% | -161.60% |
NODE vs. CIFU - Expense Ratio Comparison
NODE has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than CIFU's 1.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
NODE vs. CIFU - Dividend Comparison
NODE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.84%, while CIFU has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CIFU T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NODE VanEck Onchain Economy ETF | 0.84% | 1.12% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NODE and CIFU have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NODE is cheaper at 0.69% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NODE is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for CIFU.
NODE has the higher dividend yield at 0.84%, compared with 0.00% for CIFU.
NODE is categorized as Blockchain, while CIFU is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for NODE and 1.50% for CIFU.
Find the right allocation for NODE and CIFU
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