WEBL vs. BULZ

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

WEBL (Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X Shares) and BULZ (MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - WEBL tracks the Dow Jones Internet Composite Index (300%) while BULZ tracks the Solactive FANG Innovation. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, WEBL returned 27.57%/yr vs 77.02%/yr for BULZ. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. WEBL charges 1.17%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BULZ.

Performance

WEBL vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X Shares (WEBL) 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, WEBL achieves a -14.87% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 54.96% return.

WEBL

• 1D: -0.89%
• 1M: -2.18%
• YTD: -14.87%
• 6M: -15.88%
• 1Y: -12.75%
• 3Y*: 27.57%
• 5Y*: -21.02%
• 10Y*: —

BULZ

• 1D: 2.00%
• 1M: -11.00%
• YTD: 54.96%
• 6M: 57.61%
• 1Y: 163.08%
• 3Y*: 77.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WEBL vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
WEBL Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X Shares	-14.87%	2.37%	76.78%	165.50%	-91.04%	-18.04%
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	54.96%	60.09%	54.09%	394.22%	-92.26%	9.17%

Correlation

The correlation between WEBL and BULZ is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2021	0.85

The correlation between WEBL and BULZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.85 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

WEBL vs. BULZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WEBL	BULZ
Technology	37.7%	62.3%
Communication Services	29.7%	25.0%
Consumer Cyclical	27.7%	12.8%
Financial Services	2.4%	-
Industrials	1.4%	-
Healthcare	1.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

WEBL vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

WEBL

WEBL Risk / Return Rank: 8
WEBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
WEBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
WEBL Omega Ratio Rank: 9
WEBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
WEBL Martin Ratio Rank: 7

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 63
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 59
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

WEBL vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X Shares (WEBL) 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.

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.

	WEBL	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.22	2.12	-2.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.07	2.36	-2.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.32	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.23	3.03	-3.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.48	7.94	-8.43

WEBL vs. BULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WEBL Sharpe Ratio is -0.22, which is lower than the BULZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WEBL 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

WEBL vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

	WEBL	BULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.44%	-94.44%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-56.57%	-54.22%	-2.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-60.82%	-67.96%	+7.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-94.44%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-74.94%	-26.99%	-47.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-58.90%	-58.18%	-0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	26.44%	20.62%	+5.82%

Volatility

WEBL vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X Shares (WEBL) is 19.12%, while MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) has a volatility of 30.02%. This indicates that WEBL 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

	WEBL	BULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.12%	30.02%	-10.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.07%	61.86%	-16.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	57.70%	77.55%	-19.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	80.76%	91.54%	-10.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	82.82%	91.54%	-8.72%

WEBL vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

WEBL has a 1.17% expense ratio, which is higher than BULZ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

WEBL vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison

WEBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, while BULZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WEBL Daily Dow Jones Internet Bull 3X Shares	0.23%	0.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	4.79%	0.00%	0.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WEBL and BULZ in my portfolio?

WEBL and BULZ have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WEBL or BULZ?

BULZ has higher volatility (30.02%) compared to WEBL (19.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WEBL dropped -94.44% vs BULZ's -94.44%.

Which ETF is better, WEBL or BULZ?

On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 77.02% vs 27.57% for WEBL. On fees, BULZ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, WEBL has been the lower-risk option at 19.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WEBL or BULZ?

Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 77.02% return vs 27.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WEBL or BULZ?

BULZ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.17% for WEBL.

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

WEBL has the higher dividend yield at 0.23%, compared with 0.00% for BULZ.

What is the main difference between WEBL and BULZ?

WEBL tracks Dow Jones Internet Composite Index (300%), while BULZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.17% for WEBL and 0.95% for BULZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BULZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs -0.22), 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.