FAS vs. TMF
FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares) and TMF (Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FAS is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%), while TMF is a Leveraged Bonds fund tracking the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FAS returned 22.50%/yr vs -16.87%/yr for TMF. At a correlation of -0.30, they often move in opposite directions. FAS charges 1.00%/yr vs 1.01%/yr for TMF.
Performance
FAS vs. TMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FAS achieves a -10.50% return, which is significantly lower than TMF's -4.67% return. Over the past 10 years, FAS has outperformed TMF with an annualized return of 22.50%, while TMF has yielded a comparatively lower -16.87% annualized return.
FAS
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- 11.10%
- YTD
- -10.50%
- 6M
- -13.84%
- 1Y
- 5.47%
- 3Y*
- 41.93%
- 5Y*
- 9.82%
- 10Y*
- 22.50%
TMF
- 1D
- -0.62%
- 1M
- 4.96%
- YTD
- -4.67%
- 6M
- -5.95%
- 1Y
- -2.80%
- 3Y*
- -21.07%
- 5Y*
- -31.33%
- 10Y*
- -16.87%
FAS vs. TMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares | -10.50% | 21.48% | 84.47% | 14.92% | -43.19% | 116.59% | -34.97% | 113.04% | -33.84% | 67.37% |
TMF Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF | -4.67% | -2.94% | -35.95% | -13.01% | -72.60% | -19.80% | 39.02% | 34.75% | -11.01% | 22.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between FAS and TMF is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2009 | -0.30 |
The correlation between FAS and TMF shifts across timeframes, from -0.30 (all time) to 0.16 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
FAS vs. TMF — Risk / Return Rank
FAS
TMF
FAS vs. TMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) and Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF (TMF). 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 | TMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.01 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.13 | -0.11 | +0.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.30 | -0.23 | +0.53 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FAS vs. TMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FAS drawdown since its inception was -91.61%, roughly equal to the maximum TMF drawdown of -92.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAS and TMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FAS | TMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -91.61% | -92.89% | +1.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -40.88% | -26.51% | -14.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -43.10% | -56.09% | +12.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -66.88% | -88.81% | +21.93% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -85.99% | -92.89% | +6.90% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.88% | -92.11% | +74.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.10% | -43.76% | +12.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.17% | 12.26% | +5.91% |
Volatility
FAS vs. TMF - Volatility Comparison
Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) has a higher volatility of 12.26% compared to Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF (TMF) at 6.50%. This indicates that FAS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FAS | TMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.26% | 6.50% | +5.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 33.44% | 19.35% | +14.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.36% | 27.91% | +15.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 55.35% | 46.59% | +8.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 61.18% | 43.86% | +17.32% |
FAS vs. TMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
FAS has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is lower than TMF's 1.01% expense ratio.
Dividends
FAS vs. TMF - Dividend Comparison
FAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.32%, more than TMF's 4.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares | 9.32% | 8.21% | 0.76% | 1.77% | 0.91% | 0.60% | 0.47% | 0.62% | 1.43% | 0.11% |
TMF Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF | 4.09% | 4.06% | 4.29% | 2.82% | 1.62% | 0.13% | 2.23% | 0.94% | 1.49% | 0.41% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FAS and TMF have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FAS has higher volatility (12.26%) compared to TMF (6.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAS dropped -91.61% vs TMF's -92.89%.
On 10-year performance, FAS leads with 22.50% vs -16.87% for TMF. On fees, FAS is cheaper at 1.00% per year. On volatility, TMF has been the lower-risk option at 6.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FAS has performed better with a 22.50% return vs -16.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FAS is cheaper with a 1.00% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for TMF.
FAS has the higher dividend yield at 9.32%, compared with 4.09% for TMF.
FAS is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while TMF is Leveraged Bonds. FAS tracks Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%), while TMF tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index (300%). Their fees differ too: 1.00% for FAS and 1.01% for TMF.
FAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.13 vs -0.10), 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.
Find the right allocation for FAS and TMF
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