LULG vs VXUS
Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF vs Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
Which is better, LULG or VXUS?
Trading-Leveraged Equity against Large Cap Blend.
VXUS has a lower expense ratio. VXUS led over 1Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | LULG | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.05%Best |
| AUM | $6M | $163.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 2.38% |
| Holdings | 10 | 9,293 |
| YTD Return | -80.47% | +6.50%Best |
| 1Y Return | -68.87% | +12.09%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +18.15% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +7.38% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 77.5% | 15.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -86.7% | -11.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 1 years | $2,969 | $11,163Best |
| Fund Family | Leverage Shares | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Trading-Leveraged Equity | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 5, 2025 | Jan 26, 2011 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 5, 2025 to Nov 6, 2026 (1 years).
LULG vs VXUS growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1 years both funds cover.
LULG vs VXUS Performance
Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF (LULG) is an ETF from Leverage Shares and Vanguard Total International Stock ETF (VXUS) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year LULG returned -68.87% while VXUS returned +12.09%. Year to date, LULG is down 80.47% versus a gain of 6.50% for VXUS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LULG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 77.5% compared with 15.5% for VXUS. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -86.7% for LULG and -11.3% for VXUS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.11. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LULG charges 0.75% per year while VXUS charges 0.05%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $5 annually, a gap of $70 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LULG currently yields 0.00% against 2.38% for VXUS.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of LULG and VXUS you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, LULG or VXUS?
LULG has an expense ratio of 0.75% while VXUS charges 0.05%. VXUS is the cheaper option, by $70 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LULG or VXUS?
Over the past year LULG returned -68.87% vs +12.09% for VXUS, so VXUS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), LULG annualized -70.31% vs +11.63% for VXUS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LULG or VXUS?
LULG has been the more volatile fund at 77.5% annualized versus 15.5% for VXUS. Worst drawdown: LULG -86.7% vs VXUS -11.3%.
Should I hold both LULG and VXUS?
LULG and VXUS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.11, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, LULG or VXUS?
LULG yields 0.00% while VXUS yields 2.38%, so VXUS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VXUS better than LULG?
VXUS has a lower expense ratio. VXUS led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.