FLYU vs. FAS

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FLYU (MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs) and FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds - FLYU tracks the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index while FAS tracks the Financial Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FLYU returned 1.34%/yr vs 41.27%/yr for FAS. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLYU charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.88%/yr for FAS.

Performance

FLYU vs. FAS - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLYU achieves a -15.58% return, which is significantly lower than FAS's 0.08% return.

FLYU

• 1D: -4.41%
• 1M: 3.14%
• 6M: -21.69%
• YTD: -15.58%
• 1Y: -20.87%
• 3Y*: 1.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FAS

• 1D: 1.85%
• 1M: 15.69%
• 6M: -2.21%
• YTD: 0.08%
• 1Y: 9.95%
• 3Y*: 41.27%
• 5Y*: 12.60%
• 10Y*: 21.81%

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

FLYU vs. FAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FLYU MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs	-15.58%	-2.29%	33.00%	111.16%	-19.09%
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF	0.08%	21.48%	84.47%	14.92%	18.89%

Correlation

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

FLYU vs. FAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLYU	FAS
Consumer Cyclical	52.6%	-
Industrials	17.7%	0.2%
Technology	16.4%	1.8%
Communication Services	13.2%	-
Real Estate	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	98.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FLYU vs. FAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLYU

FLYU Risk / Return Rank: 7
FLYU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
FLYU Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
FLYU Omega Ratio Rank: 8
FLYU Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
FLYU Martin Ratio Rank: 5

FAS

FAS Risk / Return Rank: 13
FAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
FAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FAS Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
FAS Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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.

FLYU vs. FAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	FLYU	FAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.28	0.23	-0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.08	0.61	-0.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.08	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.40	0.24	-0.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.82	0.54	-1.36

FLYU vs. FAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLYU Sharpe Ratio is -0.28, which is lower than the FAS Sharpe Ratio of 0.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLYU and FAS, 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

FLYU vs. FAS - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

	FLYU	FAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-69.00%	-91.61%	+22.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-52.33%	-40.88%	-11.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-69.00%	-43.10%	-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	-33.03%	-8.18%	-24.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.55%	-31.05%	+4.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	25.61%	18.43%	+7.18%

Volatility

FLYU vs. FAS - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU) has a higher volatility of 23.31% compared to Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF (FAS) at 12.80%. This indicates that FLYU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLYU	FAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	23.31%	12.80%	+10.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	61.10%	33.89%	+27.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	74.61%	43.84%	+30.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	83.06%	55.23%	+27.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	83.06%	61.09%	+21.97%

FLYU vs. FAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FLYU vs. FAS - Dividend Comparison

FLYU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.39%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF	8.39%	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 FLYU and FAS in my portfolio?

FLYU and FAS 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, FLYU or FAS?

FLYU has higher volatility (23.31%) compared to FAS (12.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLYU dropped -69.00% vs FAS's -91.61%.

Which ETF is better, FLYU or FAS?

On 3-year performance, FAS leads with 41.27% 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 12.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLYU or FAS?

Over the 3-year period, FAS has performed better with a 41.27% return vs 1.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLYU or FAS?

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

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

FAS has the higher dividend yield at 8.39%, compared with 0.00% for FLYU.

What is the main difference between FLYU and FAS?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.23 vs -0.28), 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.