CURE vs. ICLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CURE (Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares) and ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CURE is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Health Care Select Sector Index (300%), while ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CURE returned 11.65%/yr vs 11.99%/yr for ICLN. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CURE charges 1.08%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for ICLN.

Performance

CURE vs. ICLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares (CURE) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CURE achieves a -18.38% return, which is significantly lower than ICLN's 40.54% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CURE having a 11.65% annualized return and ICLN not far ahead at 11.99%.

CURE

• 1D: 2.17%
• 1M: 4.39%
• YTD: -18.38%
• 6M: -18.70%
• 1Y: 21.60%
• 3Y*: -0.15%
• 5Y*: 0.21%
• 10Y*: 11.65%

ICLN

• 1D: -2.78%
• 1M: 11.22%
• YTD: 40.54%
• 6M: 39.84%
• 1Y: 83.73%
• 3Y*: 8.92%
• 5Y*: 2.10%
• 10Y*: 11.99%

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

CURE vs. ICLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CURE Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares	-18.38%	22.55%	-8.47%	-9.40%	-20.51%	88.30%	5.02%	55.66%	2.82%	69.32%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	40.54%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%

Correlation

The correlation between CURE and ICLN is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.25
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2011	0.44

Over the past year, the correlation between CURE and ICLN has dropped to 0.15 - well below their long-term average of 0.44, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

CURE vs. ICLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CURE	ICLN
Healthcare	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	26.4%
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	27.8%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	11.1%
Utilities	-	32.8%

Return for Risk

CURE vs. ICLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

CURE

CURE Risk / Return Rank: 18
CURE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
CURE Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
CURE Omega Ratio Rank: 18
CURE Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
CURE Martin Ratio Rank: 17

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 87
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 78
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

CURE vs. ICLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares (CURE) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). 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.

	CURE	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	3.20	-2.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.03	3.86	-2.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.48	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.70	7.50	-6.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.61	21.35	-19.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CURE vs. ICLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CURE Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the ICLN Sharpe Ratio of 3.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CURE and ICLN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CURE	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	3.20	-2.69
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.00	0.08	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.24	0.44	-0.21
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	-0.08	+0.54

Drawdowns

CURE vs. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CURE drawdown since its inception was -69.19%, smaller than the maximum ICLN drawdown of -87.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CURE and ICLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	CURE	ICLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-69.19%	-87.15%	+17.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.10%	-11.22%	-19.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-51.93%	-43.18%	-8.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.23%	-57.16%	+4.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-69.19%	-66.75%	-2.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-35.21%	-37.13%	+1.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.15%	-66.61%	+48.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.43%	3.94%	+9.49%

Volatility

CURE vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares (CURE) has a higher volatility of 11.99% compared to iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) at 9.53%. This indicates that CURE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CURE	ICLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.99%	9.53%	+2.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.83%	20.21%	+9.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.19%	26.38%	+16.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.69%	27.21%	+16.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	49.51%	27.20%	+22.31%

CURE vs. ICLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CURE has a 1.08% expense ratio, which is higher than ICLN's 0.46% expense ratio.

Dividends

CURE vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison

CURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, more than ICLN's 1.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CURE Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares	1.31%	1.12%	1.17%	2.02%	0.38%	0.02%	0.17%	0.40%	0.70%	0.18%	0.00%	0.00%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.16%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CURE and ICLN in my portfolio?

CURE and ICLN have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CURE or ICLN?

CURE has higher volatility (11.99%) compared to ICLN (9.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CURE dropped -69.19% vs ICLN's -87.15%.

Which ETF is better, CURE or ICLN?

On 10-year performance, ICLN leads with 11.99% vs 11.65% for CURE. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, ICLN has been the lower-risk option at 9.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CURE or ICLN?

Over the 10-year period, ICLN has performed better with a 11.99% return vs 11.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CURE or ICLN?

ICLN is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 1.08% for CURE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CURE or ICLN?

CURE has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 1.16% for ICLN.

What is the main difference between CURE and ICLN?

CURE is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while ICLN is Alternative Energy Equities. CURE tracks Health Care Select Sector Index (300%), while ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.08% for CURE and 0.46% for ICLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.20 vs 0.50), 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.