TWM vs. CRMG

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

TWM (ProShares UltraShort Russell2000) and CRMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. TWM is passively managed, while CRMG is actively managed. Over the past year, TWM returned -45.85% vs -65.86% for CRMG. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. TWM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CRMG.

Performance

TWM vs. CRMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TWM achieves a -32.00% return, which is significantly higher than CRMG's -64.33% return.

TWM

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: -1.95%
• 6M: -21.02%
• YTD: -32.00%
• 1Y: -45.85%
• 3Y*: -27.64%
• 5Y*: -19.69%
• 10Y*: -27.39%

CRMG

• 1D: 6.77%
• 1M: 10.88%
• 6M: -53.43%
• YTD: -64.33%
• 1Y: -65.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TWM vs. CRMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TWM ProShares UltraShort Russell2000	-32.00%	-43.71%
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF	-64.33%	-0.29%

Correlation

The correlation between TWM and CRMG is -0.08, 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	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025	-0.19

The correlation between TWM and CRMG shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (all time) to -0.08 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

TWM vs. CRMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

TWM

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

CRMG

CRMG Risk / Return Rank: 2
CRMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CRMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
CRMG Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CRMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CRMG Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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.

TWM vs. CRMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). 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.

	TWM	CRMG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.19	-0.85	-0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.83	-1.33	-0.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.80	0.85	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.91	-0.87	-0.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.45	-1.45	0.00

TWM vs. CRMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TWM Sharpe Ratio is -1.19, which is lower than the CRMG Sharpe Ratio of -0.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TWM and CRMG, 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

TWM vs. CRMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TWM drawdown since its inception was -99.94%, which is greater than CRMG's maximum drawdown of -79.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TWM and CRMG.

Drawdown Indicators

	TWM	CRMG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.94%	-79.83%	-20.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-50.65%	-75.82%	+25.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-74.44%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-76.78%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-96.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.93%	-73.90%	-26.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-87.33%	-41.04%	-46.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	31.65%	45.39%	-13.74%

Volatility

TWM vs. CRMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM) is 7.55%, while Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG) has a volatility of 23.42%. This indicates that TWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CRMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TWM	CRMG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.55%	23.42%	-15.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.50%	64.24%	-35.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	38.74%	77.97%	-39.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	45.13%	75.77%	-30.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	45.70%	75.77%	-30.07%

TWM vs. CRMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

TWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CRMG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

TWM vs. CRMG - Dividend Comparison

TWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.49%, while CRMG has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TWM ProShares UltraShort Russell2000	5.49%	5.36%	6.21%	4.72%	0.17%	0.00%	0.41%	1.49%	0.73%	0.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TWM and CRMG in my portfolio?

TWM and CRMG have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TWM or CRMG?

CRMG has higher volatility (23.42%) compared to TWM (7.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TWM dropped -99.94% vs CRMG's -79.83%.

Which ETF is better, TWM or CRMG?

On 1-year performance, TWM leads with -45.85% vs -65.86% for CRMG. On fees, CRMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, TWM has been the lower-risk option at 7.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TWM or CRMG?

Over the 1-year period, TWM has performed better with a -45.85% return vs -65.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TWM or CRMG?

CRMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TWM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TWM or CRMG?

TWM has the higher dividend yield at 5.49%, compared with 0.00% for CRMG.

What is the main difference between TWM and CRMG?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for TWM and 0.75% for CRMG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CRMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.85 vs -1.19), 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.