TNA vs. FLYU

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

TNA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares) and FLYU (MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both Leveraged Equities funds - TNA tracks the Russell 2000 Index (300%) while FLYU tracks the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TNA returned 25.74%/yr vs 4.85%/yr for FLYU. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TNA charges 1.14%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FLYU.

Performance

TNA vs. FLYU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) and MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TNA achieves a 53.14% return, which is significantly higher than FLYU's -18.15% return.

TNA

• 1D: 2.53%
• 1M: 8.84%
• YTD: 53.14%
• 6M: 40.13%
• 1Y: 117.40%
• 3Y*: 25.74%
• 5Y*: -6.50%
• 10Y*: 8.78%

FLYU

• 1D: 2.56%
• 1M: 19.09%
• YTD: -18.15%
• 6M: -16.93%
• 1Y: 1.53%
• 3Y*: 4.85%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TNA vs. FLYU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
TNA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares	53.14%	9.82%	7.21%	26.24%	-1.02%
FLYU MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs	-18.15%	-2.29%	33.00%	111.16%	-19.09%

Correlation

The correlation between TNA and FLYU is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2022	0.74

The correlation between TNA and FLYU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

TNA vs. FLYU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TNA	FLYU
Industrials	17.5%	17.7%
Technology	16.9%	16.4%
Healthcare	16.5%	-
Financial Services	15.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	52.6%
Real Estate	6.2%	0.1%
Energy	6.2%	-
Basic Materials	4.8%	-
Utilities	2.9%	-
Communication Services	2.5%	13.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	-

Return for Risk

TNA vs. FLYU — Risk / Return Rank

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

TNA

TNA Risk / Return Rank: 68
TNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
TNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
TNA Omega Ratio Rank: 54
TNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
TNA Martin Ratio Rank: 73

FLYU

FLYU Risk / Return Rank: 11
FLYU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
FLYU Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
FLYU Omega Ratio Rank: 14
FLYU Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
FLYU Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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.

TNA vs. FLYU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) and MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU). 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.

	TNA	FLYU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	0.02	+1.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	0.59	+1.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.07	+0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.63	0.03	+3.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.92	0.06	+11.85

TNA vs. FLYU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TNA Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is higher than the FLYU Sharpe Ratio of 0.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TNA and FLYU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

TNA vs. FLYU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TNA drawdown since its inception was -88.09%, which is greater than FLYU's maximum drawdown of -69.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TNA and FLYU.

Drawdown Indicators

	TNA	FLYU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.09%	-69.00%	-19.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.53%	-52.33%	+19.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-65.78%	-69.00%	+3.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-82.36%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-88.09%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-35.23%	-35.07%	-0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.92%	-26.53%	-7.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.91%	25.05%	-15.14%

Volatility

TNA vs. FLYU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) is 21.54%, while MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU) has a volatility of 23.60%. This indicates that TNA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLYU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TNA	FLYU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	21.54%	23.60%	-2.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	42.61%	59.07%	-16.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	58.70%	75.07%	-16.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	67.57%	83.21%	-15.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	68.54%	83.21%	-14.67%

TNA vs. FLYU - Expense Ratio Comparison

TNA has a 1.14% expense ratio, which is higher than FLYU's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

TNA vs. FLYU - Dividend Comparison

TNA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, while FLYU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLYU MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TNA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares	0.39%	0.78%	0.93%	1.27%	0.31%	0.06%	0.03%	0.44%	0.36%	0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TNA and FLYU in my portfolio?

TNA and FLYU have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TNA or FLYU?

FLYU has higher volatility (23.60%) compared to TNA (21.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TNA dropped -88.09% vs FLYU's -69.00%.

Which ETF is better, TNA or FLYU?

On 3-year performance, TNA leads with 25.74% vs 4.85% for FLYU. On fees, FLYU is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, TNA has been the lower-risk option at 21.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TNA or FLYU?

Over the 3-year period, TNA has performed better with a 25.74% return vs 4.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TNA or FLYU?

FLYU is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.14% for TNA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TNA or FLYU?

TNA has the higher dividend yield at 0.39%, compared with 0.00% for FLYU.

What is the main difference between TNA and FLYU?

TNA tracks Russell 2000 Index (300%), while FLYU tracks MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and REX. Their fees differ too: 1.14% for TNA and 0.95% for FLYU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TNA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs 0.02), 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.