AFSC vs. TNA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AFSC (abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF) and TNA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - AFSC is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Aberdeen, while TNA is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index (300% Daily). AFSC is actively managed, while TNA is passively managed. Over the past year, AFSC returned 34.76% vs 125.39% for TNA. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AFSC charges 0.65%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for TNA.

Performance

AFSC vs. TNA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC) and Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AFSC achieves a 24.40% return, which is significantly lower than TNA's 56.90% return.

AFSC

• 1D: -1.29%
• 1M: 6.74%
• YTD: 24.40%
• 6M: 19.46%
• 1Y: 34.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TNA

• 1D: -3.11%
• 1M: 9.59%
• YTD: 56.90%
• 6M: 45.88%
• 1Y: 125.39%
• 3Y*: 32.32%
• 5Y*: -5.98%
• 10Y*: 9.70%

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

AFSC vs. TNA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AFSC abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF	24.40%	2.33%
TNA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares	56.90%	5.18%

Correlation

The correlation between AFSC and TNA is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 18, 2025	0.91

The correlation between AFSC and TNA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AFSC vs. TNA — Risk / Return Rank

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

AFSC

AFSC Risk / Return Rank: 65
AFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
AFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
AFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
AFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
AFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 75

TNA

TNA Risk / Return Rank: 65
TNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
TNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
TNA Omega Ratio Rank: 50
TNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
TNA Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

AFSC vs. TNA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC) and Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA). 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.

	AFSC	TNA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	2.15	-0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.60	2.59	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.31	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.40	3.88	-0.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.89	12.72	+0.17

AFSC vs. TNA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AFSC Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is comparable to the TNA Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AFSC and TNA, 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

AFSC vs. TNA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AFSC drawdown since its inception was -21.93%, smaller than the maximum TNA drawdown of -88.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AFSC and TNA.

Drawdown Indicators

	AFSC	TNA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.93%	-88.09%	+66.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.29%	-32.53%	+22.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-65.78%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-82.36%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-88.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.29%	-33.64%	+32.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.12%	-33.92%	+29.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.70%	9.89%	-7.19%

Volatility

AFSC vs. TNA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC) is 5.46%, while Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) has a volatility of 19.82%. This indicates that AFSC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TNA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AFSC	TNA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.46%	19.82%	-14.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.59%	42.69%	-28.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.01%	58.76%	-39.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.51%	67.57%	-45.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.51%	68.50%	-45.99%

AFSC vs. TNA - Expense Ratio Comparison

AFSC has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than TNA's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

AFSC vs. TNA - Dividend Comparison

AFSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than TNA's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AFSC abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF	0.06%	0.08%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TNA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares	0.38%	0.78%	0.93%	1.27%	0.31%	0.06%	0.03%	0.44%	0.36%	0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AFSC and TNA in my portfolio?

AFSC and TNA have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AFSC or TNA?

TNA has higher volatility (19.82%) compared to AFSC (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AFSC dropped -21.93% vs TNA's -88.09%.

Which ETF is better, AFSC or TNA?

On 1-year performance, TNA leads with 125.39% vs 34.76% for AFSC. On fees, AFSC is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, AFSC has been the lower-risk option at 5.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AFSC or TNA?

Over the 1-year period, TNA has performed better with a 125.39% return vs 34.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AFSC or TNA?

AFSC is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for TNA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AFSC or TNA?

TNA has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.06% for AFSC.

What is the main difference between AFSC and TNA?

AFSC is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while TNA is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for AFSC and 1.05% for TNA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TNA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.84), 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.