TMF vs. FAS
TMF (Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF) and FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF) 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 Financial Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, TMF returned -18.08%/yr vs 21.50%/yr for FAS. At a correlation of -0.30, they often move in opposite directions. TMF charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.88%/yr for FAS.
Performance
TMF vs. FAS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMF achieves a -11.93% return, which is significantly lower than FAS's 0.21% return. Over the past 10 years, TMF has underperformed FAS with an annualized return of -18.08%, while FAS has yielded a comparatively higher 21.50% annualized return.
TMF
- 1D
- -1.01%
- 1M
- -10.16%
- 6M
- -9.78%
- YTD
- -11.93%
- 1Y
- -7.67%
- 3Y*
- -21.85%
- 5Y*
- -34.00%
- 10Y*
- -18.08%
- ALL TIME*
- -6.40%
FAS
- 1D
- 0.34%
- 1M
- 14.66%
- 6M
- 10.47%
- YTD
- 0.21%
- 1Y
- 9.01%
- 3Y*
- 37.42%
- 5Y*
- 13.19%
- 10Y*
- 21.50%
- ALL TIME*
- 13.87%
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 | -11.93% | -2.94% | -35.95% | -13.01% | -72.60% | -19.80% | 39.02% | 34.75% | -11.01% | 22.72% |
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF | 0.21% | 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 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.02 |
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 0.14 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
TMF vs. FAS — Risk / Return Rank
TMF
FAS
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 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.
| TMF | FAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.80 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.07 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.29 | 0.22 | -0.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.58 | 0.49 | -1.07 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMF | FAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 | -53.47% | -43.10% | -10.37% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -92.71% | -8.06% | -84.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -43.98% | -31.02% | -12.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.32% | 18.46% | -5.14% |
Volatility
TMF vs. FAS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF (TMF) is 7.32%, while Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF (FAS) has a volatility of 11.68%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMF | FAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.32% | 11.68% | -4.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.81% | 33.49% | -13.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.58% | 43.44% | -15.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 46.37% | 54.96% | -8.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 43.72% | 61.10% | -17.38% |
TMF vs. FAS - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMF has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than FAS's 0.88% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMF vs. FAS - Dividend Comparison
TMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.48%, less than FAS's 8.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF | 8.37% | 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 | 4.48% | 4.06% | 4.29% | 2.82% | 1.62% | 0.13% | 2.23% | 0.94% | 1.49% | 0.41% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMF and FAS have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FAS has higher volatility (11.68%) compared to TMF (7.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMF dropped -92.89% vs FAS's -91.61%.
On 10-year performance, FAS leads with 21.50% vs -18.08% for TMF. On fees, FAS is cheaper at 0.88% per year. On volatility, TMF 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, FAS has performed better with a 21.50% return vs -18.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FAS is cheaper with a 0.88% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for TMF.
FAS has the higher dividend yield at 8.37%, compared with 4.48% for TMF.
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 Financial Select Sector Index. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for TMF and 0.88% for FAS.
FAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.21 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.
Find the right allocation for TMF and FAS
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