PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TAN vs. CURE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

TAN vs. CURE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) and Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares (CURE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TAN achieves a 47.13% return, which is significantly higher than CURE's -20.11% return. Over the past 10 years, TAN has outperformed CURE with an annualized return of 13.81%, while CURE has yielded a comparatively lower 11.41% annualized return.


TAN

1D
1.60%
1M
21.93%
YTD
47.13%
6M
51.73%
1Y
127.12%
3Y*
0.29%
5Y*
-0.77%
10Y*
13.81%

CURE

1D
-2.92%
1M
1.15%
YTD
-20.11%
6M
-19.30%
1Y
19.67%
3Y*
-0.86%
5Y*
-0.04%
10Y*
11.41%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TAN vs. CURE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
TAN
Invesco Solar ETF
47.13%48.31%-37.61%-26.79%-5.24%-25.10%233.96%66.53%-25.67%54.38%
CURE
Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares
-20.11%22.55%-8.47%-9.40%-20.51%88.30%5.02%55.66%2.82%69.32%

Correlation

The correlation between TAN and CURE is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.18

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.24

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2011

0.38

Over the past year, the correlation between TAN and CURE has dropped to 0.18 - well below their long-term average of 0.38, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

TAN vs. CURE - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
TAN
CURE

Energy

57.3%

-

Utilities

22.1%

-

Technology

9.7%

-

Financial Services

3.6%

-

Industrials

3.3%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Healthcare

-

100.0%

Real Estate

-

-

Energy

TAN
57.3%
CURE

-

Utilities

TAN
22.1%
CURE

-

Technology

TAN
9.7%
CURE

-

Financial Services

TAN
3.6%
CURE

-

Industrials

TAN
3.3%
CURE

-

Basic Materials

TAN

-

CURE

-

Communication Services

TAN

-

CURE

-

Consumer Cyclical

TAN

-

CURE

-

Consumer Defensive

TAN

-

CURE

-

Healthcare

TAN

-

CURE
100.0%

Real Estate

TAN

-

CURE

-

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

TAN vs. CURE — Risk / Return Rank

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

TAN
TAN Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
TAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
TAN Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
TAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
TAN Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

CURE
CURE Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
CURE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CURE Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
CURE Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
CURE Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
CURE Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

TAN vs. CURE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) and Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares (CURE). 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.


TANCUREDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.44

0.46

+2.98

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.94

0.98

+2.96

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.11

+0.37

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

9.06

0.64

+8.42

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

22.01

1.49

+20.52

TAN vs. CURE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TAN Sharpe Ratio is 3.44, which is higher than the CURE Sharpe Ratio of 0.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TAN and CURE, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


TANCUREDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.44

0.46

+2.98

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.02

-0.00

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.37

0.23

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.12

0.46

-0.57

Drawdowns

TAN vs. CURE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TAN drawdown since its inception was -95.29%, which is greater than CURE's maximum drawdown of -69.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TAN and CURE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TANCUREDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-95.29%

-69.19%

-26.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.62%

-31.10%

+17.48%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-64.40%

-51.93%

-12.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-73.95%

-52.23%

-21.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-78.53%

-69.19%

-9.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-66.81%

-36.59%

-30.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-78.51%

-18.14%

-60.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.61%

13.34%

-7.73%

Volatility

TAN vs. CURE - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) and Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares (CURE) have volatilities of 11.81% and 11.87%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TANCUREDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.81%

11.87%

-0.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

25.30%

30.02%

-4.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

37.21%

43.14%

-5.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.74%

43.68%

-3.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

37.98%

49.51%

-11.53%

TAN vs. CURE - Expense Ratio Comparison

TAN has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than CURE's 1.08% expense ratio.


Dividends

TAN vs. CURE - Dividend Comparison

TAN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.34%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CURE
Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3x Shares
1.34%1.12%1.17%2.02%0.38%0.02%0.17%0.40%0.70%0.18%0.00%0.00%
TAN
Invesco Solar ETF
0.00%0.00%0.50%0.09%0.00%0.00%0.09%0.30%0.69%1.77%5.04%1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions


TAN and CURE have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CURE has higher volatility (11.87%) compared to TAN (11.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TAN dropped -95.29% vs CURE's -69.19%.

On 10-year performance, TAN leads with 13.81% vs 11.41% for CURE. On fees, TAN is cheaper at 0.69% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, TAN has performed better with a 13.81% return vs 11.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

TAN is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 1.08% for CURE.

CURE has the higher dividend yield at 1.34%, compared with 0.00% for TAN.

TAN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while CURE is Leveraged Equities. TAN tracks MAC Global Solar Energy Index, while CURE tracks Health Care Select Sector Index (300%). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for TAN and 1.08% for CURE.

TAN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.44 vs 0.46), 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 TAN and CURE

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