TSMU vs. COTG
TSMU (GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF) and COTG (Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. TSMU charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for COTG.
Performance
TSMU vs. COTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TSMU achieves a 82.73% return, which is significantly higher than COTG's 17.32% return.
TSMU
- 1D
- -3.86%
- 1M
- 16.16%
- YTD
- 82.73%
- 6M
- 90.80%
- 1Y
- 276.19%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
COTG
- 1D
- 1.39%
- 1M
- -11.21%
- YTD
- 17.32%
- 6M
- 1.51%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TSMU vs. COTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TSMU GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF | 82.73% | 19.04% |
COTG Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF | 17.32% | -21.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between TSMU and COTG is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2025 | -0.06 |
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
TSMU vs. COTG — Risk / Return Rank
TSMU
COTG
TSMU vs. COTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF (TSMU) and Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF (COTG). 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.
| TSMU | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.44 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.91 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 25.63 | — | — |
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
| TSMU | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.91 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.45 | -0.28 | +1.73 |
Drawdowns
TSMU vs. COTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TSMU drawdown since its inception was -63.73%, which is greater than COTG's maximum drawdown of -25.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TSMU and COTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TSMU | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.73% | -25.69% | -38.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.18% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.86% | -23.48% | +19.62% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.00% | -8.35% | -7.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.83% | — | — |
Volatility
TSMU vs. COTG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TSMU | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 22.60% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 54.16% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 71.26% | 40.65% | +30.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 80.45% | 40.65% | +39.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 80.45% | 40.65% | +39.80% |
TSMU vs. COTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
TSMU has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than COTG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
TSMU vs. COTG - Dividend Comparison
Neither TSMU nor COTG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
TSMU and COTG have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, COTG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
COTG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for TSMU.
TSMU and COTG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for TSMU and 0.75% for COTG.
Find the right allocation for TSMU and COTG
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