TSDD vs. BULZ

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

TSDD (GraniteShares 2x Short TSLA Daily ETF) and BULZ (MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - TSDD is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while BULZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation. TSDD is actively managed, while BULZ is passively managed. Over the past year, TSDD returned -68.74% vs 191.59% for BULZ. At a correlation of -0.60, they often move in opposite directions. TSDD charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BULZ.

Performance

TSDD vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Short TSLA Daily ETF (TSDD) and MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TSDD achieves a 11.00% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 58.16% return.

TSDD

• 1D: 13.04%
• 1M: -1.15%
• YTD: 11.00%
• 6M: 10.93%
• 1Y: -68.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BULZ

• 1D: -17.72%
• 1M: 0.22%
• YTD: 58.16%
• 6M: 47.66%
• 1Y: 191.59%
• 3Y*: 85.77%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TSDD vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TSDD GraniteShares 2x Short TSLA Daily ETF	11.00%	-74.84%	-89.21%	-20.49%
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	58.16%	60.09%	54.09%	61.60%

Correlation

The correlation between TSDD and BULZ is -0.58, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 23, 2023	-0.60

The correlation between TSDD and BULZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.60 to -0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

TSDD vs. BULZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TSDD	BULZ
Consumer Cyclical	200.1%	12.8%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	25.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	62.3%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

TSDD vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

TSDD

TSDD Risk / Return Rank: 3
TSDD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
TSDD Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
TSDD Omega Ratio Rank: 3
TSDD Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
TSDD Martin Ratio Rank: 3

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 65
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 59
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

TSDD vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Short TSLA Daily ETF (TSDD) and MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (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.

	TSDD	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.78	2.52	-3.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.17	2.59	-3.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.35	-0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.93	3.56	-4.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.20	9.50	-10.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TSDD vs. BULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TSDD Sharpe Ratio is -0.78, which is lower than the BULZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TSDD 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TSDD	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.78	2.52	-3.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.65	0.13	-0.77

Drawdowns

TSDD vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TSDD drawdown since its inception was -99.03%, roughly equal to the maximum BULZ drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TSDD and BULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	TSDD	BULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.03%	-94.44%	-4.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-74.26%	-54.22%	-20.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-67.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-98.73%	-25.49%	-73.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-71.29%	-58.35%	-12.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	60.21%	20.26%	+39.95%

Volatility

TSDD vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Short TSLA Daily ETF (TSDD) is 27.19%, while MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) has a volatility of 29.58%. This indicates that TSDD 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

	TSDD	BULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	27.19%	29.58%	-2.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	55.70%	60.38%	-4.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	93.26%	76.68%	+16.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	114.59%	91.55%	+23.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	114.59%	91.55%	+23.04%

TSDD vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

TSDD has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BULZ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

TSDD vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison

TSDD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.59%, while BULZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TSDD GraniteShares 2x Short TSLA Daily ETF	7.59%	8.42%	0.00%	24.84%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TSDD and BULZ in my portfolio?

TSDD and BULZ have a correlation of -0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TSDD or BULZ?

BULZ has higher volatility (29.58%) compared to TSDD (27.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TSDD dropped -99.03% vs BULZ's -94.44%.

Which ETF is better, TSDD or BULZ?

On 1-year performance, BULZ leads with 191.59% vs -68.74% for TSDD. On fees, BULZ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, TSDD has been the lower-risk option at 27.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TSDD or BULZ?

Over the 1-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 191.59% return vs -68.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TSDD or BULZ?

BULZ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for TSDD.

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

TSDD has the higher dividend yield at 7.59%, compared with 0.00% for BULZ.

What is the main difference between TSDD and BULZ?

TSDD is categorized as Inverse Equities, while BULZ is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for TSDD and 0.95% for BULZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BULZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs -0.78), 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.