PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CURE vs. TAN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CURE vs. TAN - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CURE achieves a -18.38% return, which is significantly lower than TAN's 43.10% return. Over the past 10 years, CURE has underperformed TAN with an annualized return of 11.65%, while TAN has yielded a comparatively higher 13.50% annualized return.


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%

TAN

1D
-2.74%
1M
20.40%
YTD
43.10%
6M
48.35%
1Y
112.42%
3Y*
-0.64%
5Y*
-1.65%
10Y*
13.50%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CURE vs. TAN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
TAN
Invesco Solar ETF
43.10%48.31%-37.61%-26.79%-5.24%-25.10%233.96%66.53%-25.67%54.38%

Correlation

The correlation between CURE and TAN is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.17

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.23

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2011

0.38

Over the past year, the correlation between CURE and TAN has dropped to 0.17 - well below their long-term average of 0.38, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

CURE vs. TAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CURE
TAN

Healthcare

100.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

57.3%

Financial Services

-

3.6%

Industrials

-

3.3%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

9.7%

Utilities

-

22.1%

Healthcare

CURE
100.0%
TAN

-

Basic Materials

CURE

-

TAN

-

Communication Services

CURE

-

TAN

-

Consumer Cyclical

CURE

-

TAN

-

Consumer Defensive

CURE

-

TAN

-

Energy

CURE

-

TAN
57.3%

Financial Services

CURE

-

TAN
3.6%

Industrials

CURE

-

TAN
3.3%

Real Estate

CURE

-

TAN

-

Technology

CURE

-

TAN
9.7%

Utilities

CURE

-

TAN
22.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

CURE vs. TAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

CURE
CURE Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
CURE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CURE Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
CURE Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
CURE Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
CURE Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

TAN
TAN Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
TAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
TAN Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
TAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
TAN Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank
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. TAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares (CURE) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN). 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.


CURETANDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.54

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.12

1.44

-0.32

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.70

8.30

-7.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.61

20.09

-18.48

CURE vs. TAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CURE Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the TAN Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CURE and TAN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CURETANDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.50

3.05

-2.54

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.00

-0.04

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.24

0.36

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

-0.12

+0.58

Drawdowns

CURE vs. TAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CURE drawdown since its inception was -69.19%, smaller than the maximum TAN drawdown of -95.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CURE and TAN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CURETANDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-69.19%

-95.29%

+26.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-31.10%

-13.62%

-17.48%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-51.93%

-64.40%

+12.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-52.23%

-73.95%

+21.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-69.19%

-78.53%

+9.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-35.21%

-67.72%

+32.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.15%

-78.51%

+60.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.43%

5.62%

+7.81%

Volatility

CURE vs. TAN - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares (CURE) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) have volatilities of 11.99% and 12.15%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CURETANDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.99%

12.15%

-0.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

29.83%

25.32%

+4.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

43.19%

37.29%

+5.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

43.69%

39.74%

+3.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

49.51%

37.98%

+11.53%

CURE vs. TAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CURE has a 1.08% expense ratio, which is higher than TAN's 0.69% expense ratio.


Dividends

CURE vs. TAN - Dividend Comparison

CURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, while TAN has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
TAN
Invesco Solar ETF
0.00%0.00%0.50%0.09%0.00%0.00%0.09%0.30%0.69%1.77%5.04%1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions


CURE and TAN have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TAN has higher volatility (12.15%) compared to CURE (11.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CURE dropped -69.19% vs TAN's -95.29%.

On 10-year performance, TAN leads with 13.50% vs 11.65% for CURE. On fees, TAN is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CURE has been the lower-risk option at 11.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, TAN has performed better with a 13.50% return vs 11.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

TAN is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 1.08% for CURE.

CURE has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 0.00% for TAN.

CURE is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while TAN is Alternative Energy Equities. CURE tracks Health Care Select Sector Index (300%), while TAN tracks MAC Global Solar Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 1.08% for CURE and 0.69% for TAN.

TAN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CURE and TAN

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer