HFGM vs. LABU
HFGM (Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF) and LABU (Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - HFGM is a Macro Trading fund actively managed by Unlimited, while LABU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index (300%). HFGM is actively managed, while LABU is passively managed. Over the past year, HFGM returned 39.23% vs 195.85% for LABU. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HFGM charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.12%/yr for LABU.
Performance
HFGM vs. LABU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HFGM achieves a 14.95% return, which is significantly higher than LABU's 3.80% return.
HFGM
- 1D
- -1.51%
- 1M
- -0.10%
- YTD
- 14.95%
- 6M
- 14.19%
- 1Y
- 39.23%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LABU
- 1D
- 4.61%
- 1M
- -11.09%
- YTD
- 3.80%
- 6M
- 3.63%
- 1Y
- 195.85%
- 3Y*
- 7.82%
- 5Y*
- -32.76%
- 10Y*
- -13.53%
HFGM vs. LABU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
HFGM Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF | 14.95% | 26.63% |
LABU Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares | 3.80% | 234.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between HFGM and LABU is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2025 | 0.30 |
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
HFGM vs. LABU — Risk / Return Rank
HFGM
LABU
HFGM vs. LABU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) and Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares (LABU). 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.
| HFGM | LABU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.61 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.35 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.70 | 6.42 | -2.72 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.95 | 18.77 | -8.81 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HFGM | LABU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.75 | 2.60 | -0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.34 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.14 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.82 | -0.24 | +2.06 |
Drawdowns
HFGM vs. LABU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HFGM drawdown since its inception was -10.66%, smaller than the maximum LABU drawdown of -99.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HFGM and LABU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HFGM | LABU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.66% | -99.18% | +88.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.66% | -30.70% | +20.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -78.30% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -97.59% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -98.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.28% | -96.34% | +91.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.68% | -81.68% | +79.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.95% | 10.48% | -6.53% |
Volatility
HFGM vs. LABU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF (HFGM) is 4.40%, while Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares (LABU) has a volatility of 27.83%. This indicates that HFGM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LABU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HFGM | LABU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.40% | 27.83% | -23.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.41% | 59.70% | -42.29% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.55% | 75.91% | -53.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.75% | 95.58% | -73.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.75% | 95.42% | -73.67% |
HFGM vs. LABU - Expense Ratio Comparison
HFGM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than LABU's 1.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
HFGM vs. LABU - Dividend Comparison
HFGM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.77%, more than LABU's 0.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HFGM Unlimited HFGM Global Macro ETF | 9.77% | 11.23% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LABU Direxion Daily S&P Biotech Bull 3x Shares | 0.74% | 0.84% | 0.35% | 0.35% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.28% | 0.64% | 0.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HFGM and LABU have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LABU has higher volatility (27.83%) compared to HFGM (4.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HFGM dropped -10.66% vs LABU's -99.18%.
On 1-year performance, LABU leads with 195.85% vs 39.23% for HFGM. On fees, HFGM is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, HFGM has been the lower-risk option at 4.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LABU has performed better with a 195.85% return vs 39.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
HFGM is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.12% for LABU.
HFGM has the higher dividend yield at 9.77%, compared with 0.74% for LABU.
HFGM is categorized as Macro Trading, while LABU is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Unlimited and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for HFGM and 1.12% for LABU.
LABU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 vs 1.75), 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 HFGM and LABU
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