EDC vs. BULZ

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

EDC (Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bull 3X Shares) and BULZ (MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - EDC tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Index (300%) while BULZ tracks the Solactive FANG Innovation. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EDC returned 43.12%/yr vs 77.02%/yr for BULZ. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EDC charges 1.33%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BULZ.

Performance

EDC vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bull 3X Shares (EDC) and MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EDC achieves a 62.45% return, which is significantly higher than BULZ's 54.96% return.

EDC

• 1D: 1.22%
• 1M: -1.45%
• YTD: 62.45%
• 6M: 72.90%
• 1Y: 137.10%
• 3Y*: 43.12%
• 5Y*: -2.02%
• 10Y*: 8.38%

BULZ

• 1D: 2.00%
• 1M: -11.00%
• YTD: 54.96%
• 6M: 57.61%
• 1Y: 163.08%
• 3Y*: 77.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EDC vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EDC Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bull 3X Shares	62.45%	94.58%	-2.00%	7.48%	-60.25%	-7.84%
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	54.96%	60.09%	54.09%	394.22%	-92.26%	9.17%

Correlation

The correlation between EDC and BULZ is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2021	0.63

The correlation between EDC and BULZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

EDC vs. BULZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EDC	BULZ
Technology	32.7%	62.3%
Financial Services	20.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.3%	12.8%
Communication Services	7.8%	25.0%
Industrials	7.3%	-
Basic Materials	7.0%	-
Energy	4.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	-
Healthcare	3.2%	-
Utilities	2.2%	-
Real Estate	1.1%	-

Return for Risk

EDC vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EDC

EDC Risk / Return Rank: 71
EDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
EDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
EDC Omega Ratio Rank: 68
EDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
EDC Martin Ratio Rank: 74

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 63
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 59
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

EDC vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bull 3X Shares (EDC) and MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ). 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.

	EDC	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.13	2.12	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.47	2.36	+0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.32	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.63	3.03	+0.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.25	7.94	+4.30

EDC vs. BULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EDC Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is comparable to the BULZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EDC and BULZ, 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

EDC vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EDC drawdown since its inception was -92.54%, roughly equal to the maximum BULZ drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDC and BULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	EDC	BULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-92.54%	-94.44%	+1.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-37.98%	-54.22%	+16.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-49.48%	-67.96%	+18.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-80.70%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-87.01%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-65.52%	-26.99%	-38.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-65.35%	-58.18%	-7.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.25%	20.62%	-9.37%

Volatility

EDC vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bull 3X Shares (EDC) has a higher volatility of 33.39% compared to MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) at 30.02%. This indicates that EDC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BULZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EDC	BULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	33.39%	30.02%	+3.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	58.40%	61.86%	-3.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	64.72%	77.55%	-12.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	57.74%	91.54%	-33.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	61.12%	91.54%	-30.42%

EDC vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EDC has a 1.33% expense ratio, which is higher than BULZ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

EDC vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison

EDC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, while BULZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EDC Direxion Daily Emerging Markets Bull 3X Shares	1.05%	1.79%	3.94%	3.54%	0.00%	0.18%	0.44%	0.97%	0.78%	0.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EDC and BULZ in my portfolio?

EDC and BULZ have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EDC or BULZ?

EDC has higher volatility (33.39%) compared to BULZ (30.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDC dropped -92.54% vs BULZ's -94.44%.

Which ETF is better, EDC or BULZ?

On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 77.02% vs 43.12% for EDC. On fees, BULZ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, BULZ has been the lower-risk option at 30.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EDC or BULZ?

Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 77.02% return vs 43.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EDC or BULZ?

BULZ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.33% for EDC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EDC or BULZ?

EDC has the higher dividend yield at 1.05%, compared with 0.00% for BULZ.

What is the main difference between EDC and BULZ?

EDC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index (300%), while BULZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.33% for EDC and 0.95% for BULZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EDC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 2.12), 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.