FAS vs. UCO
FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - FAS is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%), while UCO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FAS returned 22.50%/yr vs 19.46%/yr for UCO. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FAS charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.
Performance
FAS vs. UCO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FAS achieves a -10.50% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 81.88% return. Over the past 10 years, FAS has outperformed UCO with an annualized return of 22.50%, while UCO has yielded a comparatively lower 19.46% 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%
UCO
- 1D
- -1.26%
- 1M
- -25.61%
- YTD
- 81.88%
- 6M
- 76.32%
- 1Y
- 42.04%
- 3Y*
- 15.38%
- 5Y*
- 12.42%
- 10Y*
- 19.46%
FAS vs. UCO - 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% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 81.88% | -29.75% | 5.36% | -13.89% | 39.71% | 139.26% | 77.27% | 53.83% | -43.26% | 0.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between FAS and UCO is -0.23, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.07 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 25, 2008 | 0.28 |
The correlation between FAS and UCO shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to 0.28 (all time), 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. UCO — Risk / Return Rank
FAS
UCO
FAS vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). 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 | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.83 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.16 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.13 | 1.30 | -1.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.30 | 2.61 | -2.31 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FAS vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FAS drawdown since its inception was -91.61%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAS and UCO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FAS | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -91.61% | -99.86% | +8.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -40.88% | -32.37% | -8.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -43.10% | -50.38% | +7.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -66.88% | -67.24% | +0.36% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -85.99% | -96.50% | +10.51% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.88% | -85.89% | +68.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.10% | -82.11% | +51.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.17% | 16.23% | +1.94% |
Volatility
FAS vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) is 12.26%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 16.11%. This indicates that FAS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UCO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FAS | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.26% | 16.11% | -3.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 33.44% | 48.06% | -14.62% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.36% | 57.57% | -14.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 55.35% | 60.09% | -4.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 61.18% | 317.77% | -256.59% |
FAS vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FAS has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
FAS vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison
FAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.32%, while UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| 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% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FAS and UCO have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UCO has higher volatility (16.11%) compared to FAS (12.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAS dropped -91.61% vs UCO's -99.86%.
On 10-year performance, FAS leads with 22.50% vs 19.46% for UCO. On fees, UCO is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, FAS has been the lower-risk option at 12.26%. 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 19.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
UCO is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for FAS.
FAS has the higher dividend yield at 9.32%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.
FAS is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while UCO is Oil & Gas. FAS tracks Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%), while UCO tracks Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Direxion and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for FAS and 0.95% for UCO.
UCO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.75 vs 0.13), 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 UCO
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