FAS vs. XLF

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares) and XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FAS is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%), while XLF is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Financial Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FAS returned 22.42%/yr vs 13.68%/yr for XLF. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FAS charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for XLF.

Performance

FAS vs. XLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FAS achieves a -11.10% return, which is significantly lower than XLF's -1.10% return. Over the past 10 years, FAS has outperformed XLF with an annualized return of 22.42%, while XLF has yielded a comparatively lower 13.68% annualized return.

FAS

• 1D: 1.72%
• 1M: 10.36%
• YTD: -11.10%
• 6M: -14.01%
• 1Y: 8.67%
• 3Y*: 41.61%
• 5Y*: 10.39%
• 10Y*: 22.42%

XLF

• 1D: 0.59%
• 1M: 3.75%
• YTD: -1.10%
• 6M: -2.09%
• 1Y: 8.66%
• 3Y*: 19.81%
• 5Y*: 10.20%
• 10Y*: 13.68%

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

FAS vs. XLF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares	-11.10%	21.48%	84.47%	14.92%	-43.19%	116.59%	-34.97%	113.04%	-33.84%	67.37%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	-1.10%	14.90%	30.56%	12.03%	-10.59%	34.80%	-1.74%	31.88%	-13.06%	22.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FAS and XLF is 1.00 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.00
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	1.00
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.00
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2008	0.98

The correlation between FAS and XLF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

FAS vs. XLF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FAS	XLF
Financial Services	98.0%	98.0%
Technology	1.8%	1.8%
Industrials	0.2%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FAS vs. XLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAS

FAS Risk / Return Rank: 11
FAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
FAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
FAS Omega Ratio Rank: 12
FAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
FAS Martin Ratio Rank: 11

XLF

XLF Risk / Return Rank: 16
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 16
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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. XLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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	XLF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.20	0.60	-0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.57	0.89	-0.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.11	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.21	0.59	-0.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.48	1.50	-1.02

FAS vs. XLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAS Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is lower than the XLF Sharpe Ratio of 0.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAS and XLF, 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. XLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAS drawdown since its inception was -91.61%, which is greater than XLF's maximum drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAS and XLF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FAS	XLF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.61%	-82.69%	-8.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.88%	-14.79%	-26.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.10%	-15.54%	-27.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-66.88%	-25.81%	-41.07%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-85.99%	-42.86%	-43.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.43%	-3.96%	-14.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.10%	-20.00%	-11.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.14%	5.78%	+12.36%

Volatility

FAS vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) has a higher volatility of 12.26% compared to State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) at 4.12%. This indicates that FAS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FAS	XLF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.26%	4.12%	+8.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.44%	11.27%	+22.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.45%	14.64%	+28.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	55.35%	18.58%	+36.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	61.36%	22.18%	+39.18%

FAS vs. XLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAS has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than XLF's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

FAS vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison

FAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.38%, more than XLF's 1.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares	9.38%	8.21%	0.76%	1.77%	0.91%	0.60%	0.47%	0.62%	1.43%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	1.82%	1.31%	1.42%	1.71%	2.04%	1.63%	2.03%	1.87%	2.08%	1.48%	21.10%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FAS and XLF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 1.00, FAS and XLF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FAS or XLF?

FAS has higher volatility (12.26%) compared to XLF (4.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAS dropped -91.61% vs XLF's -82.69%.

Which ETF is better, FAS or XLF?

On 10-year performance, FAS leads with 22.42% vs 13.68% for XLF. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FAS or XLF?

Over the 10-year period, FAS has performed better with a 22.42% return vs 13.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FAS or XLF?

XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for FAS.

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

FAS has the higher dividend yield at 9.38%, compared with 1.82% for XLF.

What is the main difference between FAS and XLF?

FAS is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while XLF is Financials Equities. FAS tracks Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%), while XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and State Street. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for FAS and 0.08% for XLF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.59 vs 0.20), 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.