TMF vs. TSYW
TMF (Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF) and TSYW (Roundhill Treasury Bond WeeklyPay ETF) are both Leveraged Bonds funds. TMF is passively managed, while TSYW is actively managed. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. TMF charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for TSYW.
Performance
TMF vs. TSYW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMF achieves a -6.13% return, which is significantly lower than TSYW's -2.14% return.
TMF
- 1D
- -1.14%
- 1M
- 1.22%
- YTD
- -6.13%
- 6M
- -11.63%
- 1Y
- 0.90%
- 3Y*
- -20.78%
- 5Y*
- -30.52%
- 10Y*
- -16.56%
TSYW
- 1D
- -0.50%
- 1M
- 0.63%
- YTD
- -2.14%
- 6M
- -4.49%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TMF vs. TSYW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TMF Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF | -6.13% | -6.59% |
TSYW Roundhill Treasury Bond WeeklyPay ETF | -2.14% | -2.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMF and TSYW is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 14, 2025 | 0.98 |
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. TSYW — Risk / Return Rank
TMF
TSYW
TMF vs. TSYW - 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 Roundhill Treasury Bond WeeklyPay ETF (TSYW). 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 | TSYW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.03 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.08 | — | — |
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
| TMF | TSYW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.03 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.66 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.38 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.14 | -0.78 | +0.65 |
Drawdowns
TMF vs. TSYW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMF drawdown since its inception was -92.89%, which is greater than TSYW's maximum drawdown of -9.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMF and TSYW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMF | TSYW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -92.89% | -9.79% | -83.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.51% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -56.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -88.81% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -92.89% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -92.23% | -6.51% | -85.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -43.63% | -3.99% | -39.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.49% | — | — |
Volatility
TMF vs. TSYW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMF | TSYW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.09% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.01% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.76% | 10.78% | +17.98% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 46.75% | 10.78% | +35.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 43.92% | 10.78% | +33.14% |
TMF vs. TSYW - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMF has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than TSYW's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMF vs. TSYW - Dividend Comparison
TMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.15%, less than TSYW's 7.44% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TMF Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF | 4.15% | 4.06% | 4.29% | 2.82% | 1.62% | 0.13% | 2.23% | 0.94% | 1.49% | 0.41% |
TSYW Roundhill Treasury Bond WeeklyPay ETF | 7.44% | 1.63% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.98, TMF and TSYW 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.
On fees, TSYW is cheaper at 0.99% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
TSYW is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for TMF.
TSYW has the higher dividend yield at 7.44%, compared with 4.15% for TMF.
They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for TMF and 0.99% for TSYW.
Find the right allocation for TMF and TSYW
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