PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MVV vs. TNA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MVV vs. TNA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) and Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MVV achieves a 28.19% return, which is significantly lower than TNA's 56.19% return. Over the past 10 years, MVV has outperformed TNA with an annualized return of 12.98%, while TNA has yielded a comparatively lower 6.91% annualized return.


MVV

1D
2.04%
1M
-0.38%
6M
17.10%
YTD
28.19%
1Y
42.36%
3Y*
17.85%
5Y*
7.80%
10Y*
12.98%
ALL TIME*
11.66%

TNA

1D
5.04%
1M
-2.54%
6M
31.47%
YTD
56.19%
1Y
119.05%
3Y*
23.49%
5Y*
-2.29%
10Y*
6.91%
ALL TIME*
14.63%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$571.21K$587.07K$850.63K
$289.87M$297.37M$409.17M

MVV vs. TNA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MVV
ProShares Ultra Midcap 400
28.19%3.48%17.75%22.51%-31.96%48.57%6.20%49.50%-25.44%30.81%
TNA
Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares
56.19%9.82%7.21%26.24%-62.48%27.88%-7.82%71.88%-39.89%39.15%

Correlation

The correlation between MVV and TNA is 0.91, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.91

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.94

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.95

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2008

0.95

The correlation between MVV and TNA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

MVV vs. TNA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MVV
TNA

Industrials

25.3%
14.2%

Technology

17.2%
14.8%

Financial Services

13.9%
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

10.5%
9.2%

Healthcare

8.9%
20.3%

Real Estate

7.3%
6.6%

Basic Materials

4.8%
4.4%

Energy

4.6%
5.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
2.6%

Utilities

2.9%
2.7%

Communication Services

1.5%
2.2%

Industrials

MVV
25.3%
TNA
14.2%

Technology

MVV
17.2%
TNA
14.8%

Financial Services

MVV
13.9%
TNA
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

MVV
10.5%
TNA
9.2%

Healthcare

MVV
8.9%
TNA
20.3%

Real Estate

MVV
7.3%
TNA
6.6%

Basic Materials

MVV
4.8%
TNA
4.4%

Energy

MVV
4.6%
TNA
5.5%

Consumer Defensive

MVV
3.2%
TNA
2.6%

Utilities

MVV
2.9%
TNA
2.7%

Communication Services

MVV
1.5%
TNA
2.2%

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

MVV vs. TNA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MVV
MVV Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
MVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
MVV Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
MVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
MVV Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

TNA
TNA Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
TNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
TNA Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
TNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
TNA Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MVV vs. TNA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) and Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA). 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.


MVVTNADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.73

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.30

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.41

3.68

-1.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.19

12.08

-3.89

MVV vs. TNA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MVV Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is lower than the TNA Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MVV and TNA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MVV vs. TNA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MVV drawdown since its inception was -85.54%, roughly equal to the maximum TNA drawdown of -88.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVV and TNA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MVVTNADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-85.54%

-88.09%

+2.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.68%

-32.53%

+14.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-44.80%

-65.78%

+20.98%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.53%

-82.36%

+36.83%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-69.19%

-88.09%

+18.90%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.22%

-33.94%

+30.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.40%

-33.92%

+13.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.19%

9.89%

-4.70%

Volatility

MVV vs. TNA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) is 7.32%, while Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) has a volatility of 12.47%. This indicates that MVV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TNA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MVVTNADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.32%

12.47%

-5.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.30%

42.13%

-18.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.52%

57.70%

-26.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.50%

67.24%

-27.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

42.28%

68.38%

-26.10%

MVV vs. TNA - Expense Ratio Comparison

MVV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than TNA's 1.05% expense ratio.


Dividends

MVV vs. TNA - Dividend Comparison

MVV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.68%, more than TNA's 0.30% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MVV
ProShares Ultra Midcap 400
0.68%0.77%0.39%0.77%0.93%0.16%0.29%0.62%0.62%0.21%0.43%0.17%
TNA
Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares
0.30%0.78%0.93%1.27%0.31%0.06%0.03%0.44%0.36%0.15%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, MVV and TNA 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.

TNA has higher volatility (12.47%) compared to MVV (7.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MVV dropped -85.54% vs TNA's -88.09%.

On 10-year performance, MVV leads with 12.98% vs 6.91% for TNA. On fees, MVV is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, MVV has been the lower-risk option at 7.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, MVV has performed better with a 12.98% return vs 6.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MVV is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for TNA.

MVV has the higher dividend yield at 0.68%, compared with 0.30% for TNA.

MVV tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (200%), while TNA tracks Russell 2000 Index (300% Daily). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MVV and 1.05% for TNA.

TNA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.35), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MVV and TNA

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