FAS vs. FLYU

Last updated Jul 22, 2026

FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF) and FLYU (MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both Leveraged Equities funds - FAS tracks the Financial Select Sector Index while FLYU tracks the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FAS returned 37.42%/yr vs -1.34%/yr for FLYU. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FAS charges 0.88%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FLYU.

Performance

FAS vs. FLYU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF (FAS) and MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FAS achieves a 0.21% return, which is significantly higher than FLYU's -17.85% return.

FAS

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: 14.66%
• 6M: 10.47%
• YTD: 0.21%
• 1Y: 9.01%
• 3Y*: 37.42%
• 5Y*: 13.19%
• 10Y*: 21.50%
• ALL TIME*: 13.87%

FLYU

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: -9.91%
• 6M: -9.30%
• YTD: -17.85%
• 1Y: -22.80%
• 3Y*: -1.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.87%

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

FAS vs. FLYU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF	0.21%	21.48%	84.47%	14.92%	18.89%
FLYU MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs	-17.85%	-2.29%	33.00%	111.16%	-19.09%

Correlation

The correlation between FAS and FLYU is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2022	0.67

The correlation between FAS and FLYU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

FAS vs. FLYU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FAS	FLYU
Financial Services	98.2%	-
Technology	1.6%	16.4%
Industrials	0.2%	17.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	13.2%
Consumer Cyclical	-	52.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FAS vs. FLYU — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAS

FAS Risk / Return Rank: 15
FAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
FAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
FAS Omega Ratio Rank: 16
FAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
FAS Martin Ratio Rank: 14

FLYU

FLYU Risk / Return Rank: 7
FLYU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
FLYU Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
FLYU Omega Ratio Rank: 9
FLYU Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
FLYU Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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.

FAS vs. FLYU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF (FAS) and MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU). 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.

	FAS	FLYU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.21	-0.31	+0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.58	0.03	+0.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.00	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.22	-0.44	+0.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.49	-0.88	+1.37

FAS vs. FLYU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAS Sharpe Ratio is 0.21, which is higher than the FLYU Sharpe Ratio of -0.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAS and FLYU, 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

FAS vs. FLYU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAS drawdown since its inception was -91.61%, which is greater than FLYU's maximum drawdown of -69.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAS and FLYU.

Drawdown Indicators

	FAS	FLYU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.61%	-69.00%	-22.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.88%	-52.33%	+11.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.10%	-69.00%	+25.90%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-66.88%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-85.99%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.06%	-34.84%	+26.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.02%	-26.59%	-4.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.46%	25.94%	-7.48%

Volatility

FAS vs. FLYU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF (FAS) is 11.68%, while MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU) has a volatility of 17.61%. This indicates that FAS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLYU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FAS	FLYU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.68%	17.61%	-5.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.49%	61.02%	-27.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.44%	74.53%	-31.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	54.96%	82.89%	-27.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	61.10%	82.89%	-21.79%

FAS vs. FLYU - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAS has a 0.88% expense ratio, which is lower than FLYU's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

FAS vs. FLYU - Dividend Comparison

FAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.37%, while FLYU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF	8.37%	8.21%	0.76%	1.77%	0.91%	0.60%	0.47%	0.62%	1.43%	0.11%
FLYU MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FAS and FLYU in my portfolio?

FAS and FLYU have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FAS or FLYU?

FLYU has higher volatility (17.61%) compared to FAS (11.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAS dropped -91.61% vs FLYU's -69.00%.

Which ETF is better, FAS or FLYU?

On 3-year performance, FAS leads with 37.42% vs -1.34% for FLYU. On fees, FAS is cheaper at 0.88% per year. On volatility, FAS has been the lower-risk option at 11.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FAS or FLYU?

Over the 3-year period, FAS has performed better with a 37.42% return vs -1.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FAS or FLYU?

FAS is cheaper with a 0.88% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FLYU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FAS or FLYU?

FAS has the higher dividend yield at 8.37%, compared with 0.00% for FLYU.

What is the main difference between FAS and FLYU?

FAS tracks Financial Select Sector Index, while FLYU tracks MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.88% for FAS and 0.95% for FLYU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.21 vs -0.31), 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.