TSMU vs. GUSH

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

TSMU (GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF) and GUSH (Direxion Daily S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production Bull 2x Shares) are both Leveraged Equities funds. TSMU is actively managed, while GUSH is passively managed. Over the past year, TSMU returned 224.68% vs 31.85% for GUSH. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TSMU charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.17%/yr for GUSH.

Performance

TSMU vs. GUSH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF (TSMU) and Direxion Daily S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production Bull 2x Shares (GUSH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TSMU achieves a 76.82% return, which is significantly higher than GUSH's 42.54% return.

TSMU

• 1D: -13.58%
• 1M: 12.60%
• YTD: 76.82%
• 6M: 84.23%
• 1Y: 224.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GUSH

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: -19.15%
• YTD: 42.54%
• 6M: 41.51%
• 1Y: 31.85%
• 3Y*: 6.88%
• 5Y*: 6.25%
• 10Y*: -37.01%

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

TSMU vs. GUSH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
TSMU GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF	76.82%	74.83%	3.55%
GUSH Direxion Daily S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production Bull 2x Shares	42.54%	-19.39%	-13.58%

Correlation

The correlation between TSMU and GUSH is -0.09, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2024	0.07

The correlation between TSMU and GUSH shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

TSMU vs. GUSH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TSMU	GUSH
Technology	66.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	3.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	96.8%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

TSMU vs. GUSH — Risk / Return Rank

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

TSMU

TSMU Risk / Return Rank: 84
TSMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
TSMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
TSMU Omega Ratio Rank: 68
TSMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
TSMU Martin Ratio Rank: 91

GUSH

GUSH Risk / Return Rank: 20
GUSH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
GUSH Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
GUSH Omega Ratio Rank: 20
GUSH Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
GUSH Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

TSMU vs. GUSH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF (TSMU) and Direxion Daily S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production Bull 2x Shares (GUSH). 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.

	TSMU	GUSH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.97	0.57	+2.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.05	1.08	+1.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.13	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.43	0.88	+5.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.44	2.32	+18.12

TSMU vs. GUSH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TSMU Sharpe Ratio is 2.97, which is higher than the GUSH Sharpe Ratio of 0.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TSMU and GUSH, 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

TSMU vs. GUSH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TSMU drawdown since its inception was -63.73%, smaller than the maximum GUSH drawdown of -99.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TSMU and GUSH.

Drawdown Indicators

	TSMU	GUSH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.73%	-99.98%	+36.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-35.18%	-36.18%	+1.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-63.59%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-73.64%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-99.94%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.58%	-99.83%	+86.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.71%	-92.92%	+77.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.05%	13.77%	-2.72%

Volatility

TSMU vs. GUSH - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF (TSMU) has a higher volatility of 32.59% compared to Direxion Daily S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production Bull 2x Shares (GUSH) at 18.01%. This indicates that TSMU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GUSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TSMU	GUSH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	32.59%	18.01%	+14.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	59.71%	44.07%	+15.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	76.25%	56.58%	+19.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	82.32%	68.20%	+14.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	82.32%	93.43%	-11.11%

TSMU vs. GUSH - Expense Ratio Comparison

TSMU has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than GUSH's 1.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

TSMU vs. GUSH - Dividend Comparison

TSMU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GUSH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GUSH Direxion Daily S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production Bull 2x Shares	1.75%	2.60%	2.96%	3.00%	0.47%	0.00%	0.20%	1.68%	0.17%	0.00%	3.26%
TSMU GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TSMU and GUSH in my portfolio?

TSMU and GUSH have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TSMU or GUSH?

TSMU has higher volatility (32.59%) compared to GUSH (18.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TSMU dropped -63.73% vs GUSH's -99.98%.

Which ETF is better, TSMU or GUSH?

On 1-year performance, TSMU leads with 224.68% vs 31.85% for GUSH. On fees, GUSH is cheaper at 1.17% per year. On volatility, GUSH has been the lower-risk option at 18.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TSMU or GUSH?

Over the 1-year period, TSMU has performed better with a 224.68% return vs 31.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TSMU or GUSH?

GUSH is cheaper with a 1.17% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for TSMU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TSMU or GUSH?

GUSH has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 0.00% for TSMU.

What is the main difference between TSMU and GUSH?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for TSMU and 1.17% for GUSH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TSMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 vs 0.57), 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.