Tesla Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) shares gained nearly 10% between Sep. 8, 2025, and Oct. 9, 2026, but five daily 2X leveraged Tesla ETFs, designed to deliver twice Tesla’s daily returns, posted losses of roughly 13.5% to 17.2%. More surprisingly, the funds recorded a 370-basis-point gap in returns despite targeting essentially the same daily exposure.
Morningstar Research Managing Director Jeffrey Ptak highlighted the divergence in a post on X, raising questions about how investors compare leveraged single-stock ETFs that promise the same objective.
Five Tesla ETFs, Five Different Returns
- Ptak’s comparison covers the period beginning Sept. 8, 2025, the latest inception date among the ETFs, through Oct. 9, 2026.
- Tesla: up 9.5%
- Direxion Daily TSLA Bull 2X ETF (NASDAQ:TSLL): down approximately 15%
- T-REX 2X Long Tesla Daily Target ETF (BATS:TSLT): down around 17.2%
- GraniteShares 2x Long TSLA Daily ETF (NASDAQ:TSLR): down around 13.5%
- Leverage Shares 2X Long TSLA Daily ETF (NASDAQ:TSLG): down around 14.6%
- ProShares Ultra TSLA (NYSE:TSLI): down approximately 15.8%
GraniteShares’ TSLR was the best performer, while T-REX’s TSLT recorded the steepest decline. The 3.7-percentage-point difference is notable because traders may assume ETFs tracking the same stock with the same leverage target are interchangeable.
However, the chart doesn’t explain why the funds diverged or how much each factor contributed.
Why 2X Tesla ETFs Can Lose While Tesla Rises
These ETFs target twice Tesla’s daily return, not twice its cumulative return over a year. Daily resetting and compounding can therefore produce results that differ substantially from twice the stock’s long-term performance.
Consider a simplified example. If Tesla falls 10% one day and rises 11.1% the next, its price roughly returns to its starting point. A hypothetical 2X fund loses 20% on the first day and gains about 22.2% on the second, leaving it down roughly 2.2% before fees and other costs.
This volatility drag can accumulate when prices fluctuate sharply, even if the underlying stock eventually recovers.
Fees Explain Only Part of the Difference
The ETFs also charge different expense ratios. Direxion lists a net expense ratio of 0.83% for TSLL, GraniteShares charges 0.95% for TSLR, Leverage Shares lists 0.75% for TSLG, ProShares charges 0.95% for TSLI, and T-REX lists a total expense ratio of 1.05% for TSLT.
The 30-basis-point spread between the highest- and lowest-cost funds is considerably smaller than their 370-basis-point performance gap.
Other factors, including derivative financing costs, trading frictions, portfolio implementation and tracking differences, may contribute. Determining their precise impact would require a separate analysis of each fund’s holdings, daily returns and expenses.
What Investors Should Watch
The comparison underscores why traders should look beyond a fund’s stated leverage multiple. Expense ratios, bid-ask spreads, liquidity and actual tracking performance all matter, particularly when positions are held for longer than a single session.
Performance rankings can also change with market conditions. Past returns do not establish which ETF will outperform next.
The takeaway is that two ETFs can promise the same 2X daily Tesla exposure yet deliver meaningfully different results over time. For leveraged ETF traders, choosing the right vehicle can matter almost as much as getting the stock direction right.
Photo: Shutterstock
