TMF vs. FAS

Last updated Jun 10, 2026

TMF (Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF) and FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - TMF is a Leveraged Bonds fund tracking the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index (300%), while FAS is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, TMF returned -16.90%/yr vs 19.91%/yr for FAS. At a correlation of -0.30, they often move in opposite directions. TMF charges 1.01%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for FAS.

Performance

TMF vs. FAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF (TMF) and Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMF achieves a -6.85% return, which is significantly higher than FAS's -17.44% return. Over the past 10 years, TMF has underperformed FAS with an annualized return of -16.90%, while FAS has yielded a comparatively higher 19.91% annualized return.

TMF

• 1D: 1.71%
• 1M: -2.92%
• YTD: -6.85%
• 6M: -8.82%
• 1Y: -1.07%
• 3Y*: -20.85%
• 5Y*: -31.43%
• 10Y*: -16.90%

FAS

• 1D: 2.86%
• 1M: 6.03%
• YTD: -17.44%
• 6M: -9.85%
• 1Y: -3.37%
• 3Y*: 36.76%
• 5Y*: 6.62%
• 10Y*: 19.91%

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

TMF vs. FAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
TMF Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF	-6.85%	-2.94%	-35.95%	-13.01%	-72.60%	-19.80%	39.02%	34.75%	-11.01%	22.72%
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares	-17.44%	21.48%	84.47%	14.92%	-43.19%	116.59%	-34.97%	113.04%	-33.84%	67.37%

Correlation

The correlation between TMF and FAS is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.14
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.00
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2009	-0.30

The correlation between TMF and FAS shifts across timeframes, from -0.30 (all time) to 0.15 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

TMF vs. FAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMF	FAS
Financial Services	18.4%	98.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	0.2%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	1.7%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

TMF vs. FAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMF

TMF Risk / Return Rank: 9
TMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
TMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
TMF Omega Ratio Rank: 9
TMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
TMF Martin Ratio Rank: 9

FAS

FAS Risk / Return Rank: 9
FAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
FAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
FAS Omega Ratio Rank: 10
FAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
FAS Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

TMF vs. FAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF (TMF) and Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (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.

	TMF	FAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.04	-0.08	+0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.15	0.19	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.02	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	-0.08	+0.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.09	-0.19	+0.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TMF vs. FAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMF Sharpe Ratio is -0.04, which is higher than the FAS Sharpe Ratio of -0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMF 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TMF	FAS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.04	-0.08	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.68	0.12	-0.80
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.39	0.33	-0.71
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.14	0.17	-0.31

Drawdowns

TMF vs. FAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMF drawdown since its inception was -92.89%, roughly equal to the maximum FAS drawdown of -91.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMF and FAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMF	FAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-92.89%	-91.61%	-1.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.51%	-40.88%	+14.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.31%	-43.10%	-13.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-88.81%	-66.88%	-21.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-92.89%	-85.99%	-6.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-92.29%	-24.24%	-68.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.66%	-31.12%	-12.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.77%	17.79%	-6.02%

Volatility

TMF vs. FAS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF (TMF) is 7.87%, while Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) has a volatility of 12.33%. This indicates that TMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMF	FAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.87%	12.33%	-4.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.09%	33.34%	-14.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.24%	43.37%	-15.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	46.71%	55.59%	-8.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	43.92%	61.35%	-17.43%

TMF vs. FAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMF has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than FAS's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMF vs. FAS - Dividend Comparison

TMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.19%, less than FAS's 10.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares	10.10%	8.21%	0.76%	1.77%	0.91%	0.60%	0.47%	0.62%	1.43%	0.11%
TMF Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF	4.19%	4.06%	4.29%	2.82%	1.62%	0.13%	2.23%	0.94%	1.49%	0.41%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMF and FAS in my portfolio?

TMF and FAS have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMF or FAS?

FAS has higher volatility (12.33%) compared to TMF (7.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMF dropped -92.89% vs FAS's -91.61%.

Which ETF is better, TMF or FAS?

On 10-year performance, FAS leads with 19.91% vs -16.90% for TMF. On fees, FAS is cheaper at 1.00% per year. On volatility, TMF has been the lower-risk option at 7.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMF or FAS?

Over the 10-year period, FAS has performed better with a 19.91% return vs -16.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMF or FAS?

FAS is cheaper with a 1.00% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for TMF.

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

FAS has the higher dividend yield at 10.10%, compared with 4.19% for TMF.

What is the main difference between TMF and FAS?

TMF is categorized as Leveraged Bonds, while FAS is Leveraged Equities. TMF tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index (300%), while FAS tracks Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%). Their fees differ too: 1.01% for TMF and 1.00% for FAS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.04 vs -0.08), 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.