“Sometimes getting everything you wish for can be a very dangerous thing. Purchasing a single stock levered ETF is just that – an investment in a completely focused manner, leveraged to add rocket fuel to returns. Add in volatility decay and compounding, and you're looking at a quick way to suffer devastating losses.”
- John Thurber
“Levered ETFs may appeal to those who wish to hedge other positions, those with strong directional views, or those with so-called ‘lottery preferences’.”
- Hendrik Bessembinder
Overview
In 2025, with the Magnificent Seven stocks in focus, investors have sought ways to capture returns from individual members of the group. Single-stock levered exchange-traded funds (ETFs) have adopted these strategies and have proliferated. In particular, retail investors have focused on names such as Nvidia, Tesla, Meta, and Amazon. Once considered tools for professional traders, these funds have now become the latest playthings for day-traders and other individual investors/speculators.
Single-stock levered ETFs are designed to provide magnified exposure, typically two to three times, to the daily price of a single stock. Rather than using margin, these funds use derivatives (such as futures contracts or swaps) to achieve their leverage. Unlike traditional ETFs that track a broad index or basket of securities, these funds concentrate all exposure on one stock, making them inherently more volatile.
These products first appeared in 2022 and were immediately identified as prime opportunities for individual investors to lose a substantial amount of money. This assessment was based on concerns that expenses were prohibitive, and volatility decay was poorly understood by retail investors. Did that stop Wall Street? Not a chance! Within a few years, companies such as GraniteShares and Direxion were flooding the market with hundreds of such products. They perfectly met the growing desire for short-term trading (minutes rather than hours, days, or, God forbid, weeks) that (supposedly) promised potentially very high returns.
There are a couple of reasons why these ETFs have suddenly become so popular. First, retail investors are increasingly attracted to speculative strategies as they get an ever-increasing amount of research from sites such as X (formerly Twitter) and Reddit. Similar to the meme stock craze, these sites have become hubs for increasingly ridiculous trading strategies. Second, it isn’t enough to recommend rapid day trading; it also encourages leveraging the size of your return (or, more likely, your losses). Investors don’t need to open margin accounts or meet regulatory requirements when they can simply click to purchase shares of a 3x leveraged ETF. For those seeking that kind of workaround, single-stock leveraged ETFs offer a compelling way to supercharge bets on momentum names without the complications of margin trading.
What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Of course, for every person who boasts at the neighborhood barbecue that they tripled their investment on the Hot Stock Triple Levered ETF, there are another four who remain silent and unwilling to share the shame of losing three-quarters of their investment in a similar ETF.
Single-stock leveraged ETFs were not created for investors. Rather, they were designed to serve a very narrow niche of traders seeking additional exposure over the course of a single day’s trading. These funds can erode value incredibly quickly, to the point where the underlying stock might go up slightly while the fund loses money. How can that be? To better understand these two, we can turn to our go-to academic investment guru, Hendrik Bessembinder, at the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University. In a paper published in 2025[1], Bessembinder divided the cause of ETF underperformance into two buckets: daily rebalancing trades and frictions such as fees, trading costs, and excess loan margins.
Bessembinder found that long-levered single stock ETFs underperform by an average of 0.79% per month, with 0.26% attributable to daily rebalancing and 0.53% to frictions. Breaking the ETFs into positive leverage versus inverse leverage, Bessembinder found that friction costs were higher for positive leverage (average of 0.53% per month) than for inverse leverage funds (average of 0.26% per month), while rebalancing costs were higher for negative (average of 0.73%) than for positive leverage (average of 0.27%) funds.
What investors need to understand is that even if they ignore the high friction costs Bessembinder identified, these products are designed to provide leveraged exposure to daily returns, not long-term performance. Anyone who invests in these funds, thinking they can buy and hold or seek long-term gains, will be quickly disabused of these notions. As an example of truthful marketing (ever so rare in today’s investment world), Direxion (one of the leading providers of levered ETFs) describes its target market as follows: “Now risk-hungry traders can get daily 2X bull or -1X bear exposure to heavily traded individual large cap stocks.” (emphasis mine). Note that “risk-hungry” and “daily” are specifically mentioned as attributes of their target investor.
A Working Example: The CSOP SK Hynix Daily (2X)
Ground zero for the explosion of single-stock leveraged ETFs is Hong Kong. The South Korean company SK Hynix is a major player in the artificial intelligence (AI) market. Together with Samsung, the two companies account for over 60% of the benchmark KOSPI index's total market capitalization. Given SK Hynix's importance in the AI space, investors poured into the CSOP SK Hynix (2X) leveraged product. Launched in October 2025, the CSOP SK Hynix leveraged ETF has ballooned into a $13 billion fund, the largest of any leveraged fund. On volatile days, the ETF and its smaller peers can account for two-thirds of trading in SK Hynix shares. This is shocking for a company with a $1.2 trillion market cap. This has placed enormous strain on financial players around the globe to create a system using a disparate group of financing and hedging to support the ETF’s operations. The numbers have become so large that it is unclear who is driving the stock price – the stock or the ETF. This is all part of the broader leveraged AI-focused fund market, which has grown to $250 billion. (Remember: this is just AI-focused!)
The problem with this is that the CSOP SK Hynix ETF can drag down the entire South Korean market and even significantly impact global equity markets. This past Thursday (June 25, 2026) delivered another reminder of that risk: The ETF plunged more than 20%, as it had early last week, helping drag the stock down more than 10% and triggering a 2% slump in MSCI’s benchmark emerging-market index. Just one ETF provoked these results.
Conclusions
It’s hard to say where this is going to end. The rise of single-stock leveraged ETFs marks a significant evolution in retail speculative investing, offering powerful tools to those seeking amplified returns while also carrying equally significant risks. As with all high-powered investment vehicles, success depends not just on opportunity but on understanding. There aren’t many investors (or should we say, speculators?) who fully understand the underlying danger of levered single-stock ETFs. The risks associated with volatility decay and operating expenses far outweigh potential gains for most investors/speculators. By their very design, levered single-stock ETFs are a loser’s game. It shouldn’t surprise us that Wall Street and other financial engineers have created such ugly beasts. The question is how much damage these products will cause. The worst losses in Wall Street’s history have stemmed from failing to recognize the link between risk and the additional dangers of leverage. We can only hope this product’s life is short enough to prevent a truly global problem. Unfortunately, history – and investor greed - doesn’t give us much hope.
DISCLOSURES: None
[1] “Returns to Constant Leverage Strategies: General Principles and Application to Levered Single-Stock ETFs”, Hendrik Bessembinder, July 28, 2025
- John Thurber
“Levered ETFs may appeal to those who wish to hedge other positions, those with strong directional views, or those with so-called ‘lottery preferences’.”
- Hendrik Bessembinder
Overview
In 2025, with the Magnificent Seven stocks in focus, investors have sought ways to capture returns from individual members of the group. Single-stock levered exchange-traded funds (ETFs) have adopted these strategies and have proliferated. In particular, retail investors have focused on names such as Nvidia, Tesla, Meta, and Amazon. Once considered tools for professional traders, these funds have now become the latest playthings for day-traders and other individual investors/speculators.
Single-stock levered ETFs are designed to provide magnified exposure, typically two to three times, to the daily price of a single stock. Rather than using margin, these funds use derivatives (such as futures contracts or swaps) to achieve their leverage. Unlike traditional ETFs that track a broad index or basket of securities, these funds concentrate all exposure on one stock, making them inherently more volatile.
These products first appeared in 2022 and were immediately identified as prime opportunities for individual investors to lose a substantial amount of money. This assessment was based on concerns that expenses were prohibitive, and volatility decay was poorly understood by retail investors. Did that stop Wall Street? Not a chance! Within a few years, companies such as GraniteShares and Direxion were flooding the market with hundreds of such products. They perfectly met the growing desire for short-term trading (minutes rather than hours, days, or, God forbid, weeks) that (supposedly) promised potentially very high returns.
There are a couple of reasons why these ETFs have suddenly become so popular. First, retail investors are increasingly attracted to speculative strategies as they get an ever-increasing amount of research from sites such as X (formerly Twitter) and Reddit. Similar to the meme stock craze, these sites have become hubs for increasingly ridiculous trading strategies. Second, it isn’t enough to recommend rapid day trading; it also encourages leveraging the size of your return (or, more likely, your losses). Investors don’t need to open margin accounts or meet regulatory requirements when they can simply click to purchase shares of a 3x leveraged ETF. For those seeking that kind of workaround, single-stock leveraged ETFs offer a compelling way to supercharge bets on momentum names without the complications of margin trading.
What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Of course, for every person who boasts at the neighborhood barbecue that they tripled their investment on the Hot Stock Triple Levered ETF, there are another four who remain silent and unwilling to share the shame of losing three-quarters of their investment in a similar ETF.
Single-stock leveraged ETFs were not created for investors. Rather, they were designed to serve a very narrow niche of traders seeking additional exposure over the course of a single day’s trading. These funds can erode value incredibly quickly, to the point where the underlying stock might go up slightly while the fund loses money. How can that be? To better understand these two, we can turn to our go-to academic investment guru, Hendrik Bessembinder, at the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University. In a paper published in 2025[1], Bessembinder divided the cause of ETF underperformance into two buckets: daily rebalancing trades and frictions such as fees, trading costs, and excess loan margins.
Bessembinder found that long-levered single stock ETFs underperform by an average of 0.79% per month, with 0.26% attributable to daily rebalancing and 0.53% to frictions. Breaking the ETFs into positive leverage versus inverse leverage, Bessembinder found that friction costs were higher for positive leverage (average of 0.53% per month) than for inverse leverage funds (average of 0.26% per month), while rebalancing costs were higher for negative (average of 0.73%) than for positive leverage (average of 0.27%) funds.
What investors need to understand is that even if they ignore the high friction costs Bessembinder identified, these products are designed to provide leveraged exposure to daily returns, not long-term performance. Anyone who invests in these funds, thinking they can buy and hold or seek long-term gains, will be quickly disabused of these notions. As an example of truthful marketing (ever so rare in today’s investment world), Direxion (one of the leading providers of levered ETFs) describes its target market as follows: “Now risk-hungry traders can get daily 2X bull or -1X bear exposure to heavily traded individual large cap stocks.” (emphasis mine). Note that “risk-hungry” and “daily” are specifically mentioned as attributes of their target investor.
A Working Example: The CSOP SK Hynix Daily (2X)
Ground zero for the explosion of single-stock leveraged ETFs is Hong Kong. The South Korean company SK Hynix is a major player in the artificial intelligence (AI) market. Together with Samsung, the two companies account for over 60% of the benchmark KOSPI index's total market capitalization. Given SK Hynix's importance in the AI space, investors poured into the CSOP SK Hynix (2X) leveraged product. Launched in October 2025, the CSOP SK Hynix leveraged ETF has ballooned into a $13 billion fund, the largest of any leveraged fund. On volatile days, the ETF and its smaller peers can account for two-thirds of trading in SK Hynix shares. This is shocking for a company with a $1.2 trillion market cap. This has placed enormous strain on financial players around the globe to create a system using a disparate group of financing and hedging to support the ETF’s operations. The numbers have become so large that it is unclear who is driving the stock price – the stock or the ETF. This is all part of the broader leveraged AI-focused fund market, which has grown to $250 billion. (Remember: this is just AI-focused!)
The problem with this is that the CSOP SK Hynix ETF can drag down the entire South Korean market and even significantly impact global equity markets. This past Thursday (June 25, 2026) delivered another reminder of that risk: The ETF plunged more than 20%, as it had early last week, helping drag the stock down more than 10% and triggering a 2% slump in MSCI’s benchmark emerging-market index. Just one ETF provoked these results.
Conclusions
It’s hard to say where this is going to end. The rise of single-stock leveraged ETFs marks a significant evolution in retail speculative investing, offering powerful tools to those seeking amplified returns while also carrying equally significant risks. As with all high-powered investment vehicles, success depends not just on opportunity but on understanding. There aren’t many investors (or should we say, speculators?) who fully understand the underlying danger of levered single-stock ETFs. The risks associated with volatility decay and operating expenses far outweigh potential gains for most investors/speculators. By their very design, levered single-stock ETFs are a loser’s game. It shouldn’t surprise us that Wall Street and other financial engineers have created such ugly beasts. The question is how much damage these products will cause. The worst losses in Wall Street’s history have stemmed from failing to recognize the link between risk and the additional dangers of leverage. We can only hope this product’s life is short enough to prevent a truly global problem. Unfortunately, history – and investor greed - doesn’t give us much hope.
DISCLOSURES: None
[1] “Returns to Constant Leverage Strategies: General Principles and Application to Levered Single-Stock ETFs”, Hendrik Bessembinder, July 28, 2025
RSS Feed