NUGT vs. BULZ

Last updated Jul 22, 2026

NUGT (Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF) and BULZ (MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both exchange-traded funds - NUGT is a Gold fund tracking the MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index (200%), while BULZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, NUGT returned 45.28%/yr vs 68.81%/yr for BULZ. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NUGT charges 1.13%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BULZ.

Performance

NUGT vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF (NUGT) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NUGT achieves a -39.10% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 38.51% return.

NUGT

• 1D: 9.53%
• 1M: -21.00%
• 6M: -57.23%
• YTD: -39.10%
• 1Y: 46.53%
• 3Y*: 45.28%
• 5Y*: 15.97%
• 10Y*: -14.12%
• ALL TIME*: -33.85%

BULZ

• 1D: 10.04%
• 1M: -16.61%
• 6M: 40.54%
• YTD: 38.51%
• 1Y: 89.80%
• 3Y*: 68.81%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.50%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NUGT vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
NUGT Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF	-39.10%	425.05%	2.89%	2.60%	-32.10%	-1.04%
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs	38.51%	60.09%	54.09%	394.22%	-92.26%	9.17%

Correlation

The correlation between NUGT and BULZ is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2021	0.22

The correlation between NUGT and BULZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.22 (all time) to 0.36 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NUGT vs. BULZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NUGT	BULZ
Basic Materials	100.0%	-
Communication Services	-	20.9%
Consumer Cyclical	-	14.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	13.3%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	65.0%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

NUGT vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

NUGT

NUGT Risk / Return Rank: 24
NUGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
NUGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
NUGT Omega Ratio Rank: 31
NUGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
NUGT Martin Ratio Rank: 20

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 42
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 44
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 36

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

NUGT vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF (NUGT) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ). 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.

	NUGT	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.49	1.10	-0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.22	1.71	-0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.22	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.69	1.67	-0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.47	3.92	-2.45

NUGT vs. BULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUGT Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is lower than the BULZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUGT and BULZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

NUGT vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUGT drawdown since its inception was -99.97%, which is greater than BULZ's maximum drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUGT and BULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	NUGT	BULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.97%	-94.44%	-5.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-67.40%	-54.22%	-13.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-67.40%	-67.96%	+0.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-73.72%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-96.91%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.86%	-34.74%	-65.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-91.57%	-57.65%	-33.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	31.68%	22.96%	+8.72%

Volatility

NUGT vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF (NUGT) is 24.61%, while MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) has a volatility of 26.72%. This indicates that NUGT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BULZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NUGT	BULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	24.61%	26.72%	-2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	80.75%	66.44%	+14.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	95.76%	82.28%	+13.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	73.43%	91.72%	-18.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	87.54%	91.72%	-4.18%

NUGT vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

NUGT has a 1.13% expense ratio, which is higher than BULZ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

NUGT vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison

NUGT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, while BULZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NUGT Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF	0.64%	0.22%	1.79%	1.67%	0.70%	0.00%	0.00%	0.63%	0.57%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NUGT and BULZ in my portfolio?

NUGT and BULZ have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NUGT or BULZ?

BULZ has higher volatility (26.72%) compared to NUGT (24.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NUGT dropped -99.97% vs BULZ's -94.44%.

Which ETF is better, NUGT or BULZ?

On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 68.81% vs 45.28% for NUGT. On fees, BULZ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, NUGT has been the lower-risk option at 24.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NUGT or BULZ?

Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 68.81% return vs 45.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NUGT or BULZ?

BULZ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.13% for NUGT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NUGT or BULZ?

NUGT has the higher dividend yield at 0.64%, compared with 0.00% for BULZ.

What is the main difference between NUGT and BULZ?

NUGT is categorized as Gold, while BULZ is Leveraged Equities. NUGT tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index (200%), while BULZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%). They also come from different issuers: Direxion and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.13% for NUGT and 0.95% for BULZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BULZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.10 vs 0.49), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.