RWM ranks 4th and DUST 29th of 53 funds in the Leveraged Inverse (2x & Other) Category.
DUST vs RWM
0.0%by weight
DUST −0.01pt a year
0.94%0.95%
RWM 28.1×the volume
1.07M30M
RWM +41.6pt
−52.9%−11.3%
DUST vs RWM Performance
−97.6%−15.9%
- DUST 0.94%, better
- RWM 0.95%
- DUST $71M
- RWM $163M
- DUST −57.4%
- RWM −10.1%, better
- DUST 4.27%, better
- RWM 3.31%
- DUST 5
- RWM 3
- DUST 1.07M sh
- RWM 30M sh, better
- DUST $49.99
- RWM $14.37
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | DUST | RWM |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | C50 | C50 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | F19 | B60Higher |
| Tradability | C53 | A90Higher |
| Holdings | B63 | |
| Durability | B57 | B69Higher |
Rank among Leveraged Inverse (2x & Other) funds
Same Category. DUST and RWM are both graded against the same 53 Leveraged Inverse (2x & Other) funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
DUSTC
RWMB
In short
DUST The gold-miner short, in one ticker. Running since 2010, DUST aims for 200% of the inverse of the daily move in global gold miners, then resets at the bell. Direxion dialed the target back from 3x to 2x in 2020.
RWM Short small caps at one speed: RWM targets the inverse of the Russell 2000's daily move, with no 2x or 3x multiplier on top. Trading since 2007, at 0.95% net of a waiver through September 30, 2027.
Stated mandate
DUST The fund seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, equal to 200% of the inverse performance of the MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. The issuer states that achieving this objective is not guaranteed.
RWM The fund seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, that correspond to the inverse of the Russell 2000 Index's daily performance.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
DUST vs RWM Holdings
How DUST and RWM differ
0.0%
Shared holdings make up 0.0% of DUST and 0.0% of RWM.
Level by level
- Asset class0.0%
- Holdings0.0%
Sector
No Sector split for DUST.
Country, concentration and asset class
Country
No country split for DUST.
Concentration
- DUST194.4%
- RWM100.0%
- DUST0
- RWM2
Asset class
- DUST
- Leveraged/Inverse
- RWM
- Equity
Holdings
- Only in DUST0
- In both0
- Only in RWM2
Only in DUST
0 securities, 0.0% of DUST by weight
Only in RWM
2 securities, 86.4% of RWM by weight
- Proshares Genius Mny Mkt Etf81.69%
- TREASURY BILL, 0%, due 2026-12-174.71%
Weight gaps
DUST and RWM share no securities.
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
DUST vs RWM Cost
Overpaying RWM vs DUST
$165
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
DUST 0.94%
$17,704
RWM 0.95%
$17,869
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | DUST | RWM | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,661 | $1,678 | $17 |
| 20 | $6,260 | $6,322 | $62 |
| 30 | $17,704 | $17,869 | $165 |
- 0.94%DUST, cheaper
- 0.95%RWM
- Middle half of Leveraged Inverse (2x & Other) funds
- Median 0.95%
DUST 5th cheapest of 53 funds
RWM 6th cheapest of 53 funds
DUST vs RWM Dividends
- DUST 4.27%, better
- RWM 3.31%
- DUST $2.02
- RWM $0.48
- DUST $0.28
- RWM $0.09
- DUST Sep 22, 2026
- RWM Sep 23, 2026
- DUST Sep 29, 2026
- RWM Sep 29, 2026
- DUST Quarterly
- RWM Quarterly
Distribution history
DUST vs RWM Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- DUST
- RWM
Risk facts
- Volatility
- DUST 72.7%RWM 18.4%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- DUST −1.10RWM −0.99, better
- Worst fall
- DUST −99.0%RWM −43.7%, better
- Market sensitivity
- DUST −0.86RWM −1.23
Popular comparisons
- 0.94% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.94% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.94% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.