TNA vs. GDX
TNA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares) and GDX (VanEck Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TNA is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index (300%), while GDX is a Gold fund tracking the NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, TNA returned 8.78%/yr vs 13.29%/yr for GDX. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TNA charges 1.14%/yr vs 0.51%/yr for GDX.
Performance
TNA vs. GDX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TNA achieves a 53.14% return, which is significantly higher than GDX's -6.69% return. Over the past 10 years, TNA has underperformed GDX with an annualized return of 8.78%, while GDX has yielded a comparatively higher 13.29% annualized 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%
GDX
- 1D
- 2.97%
- 1M
- -16.83%
- YTD
- -6.69%
- 6M
- -5.89%
- 1Y
- 50.59%
- 3Y*
- 38.96%
- 5Y*
- 17.51%
- 10Y*
- 13.29%
TNA vs. GDX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TNA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares | 53.14% | 9.82% | 7.21% | 26.24% | -62.48% | 27.88% | -7.82% | 71.88% | -39.89% | 39.15% |
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF | -6.69% | 154.77% | 10.63% | 9.98% | -9.01% | -9.52% | 23.66% | 39.84% | -8.77% | 11.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between TNA and GDX is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2008 | 0.23 |
The correlation between TNA and GDX shifts across timeframes, from 0.19 (10 years) to 0.40 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
TNA vs. GDX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TNA
GDX
Industrials
-
Technology
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
-
Basic Materials
Utilities
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
TNA
GDX
-
Technology
TNA
GDX
-
Healthcare
TNA
GDX
-
Financial Services
TNA
GDX
-
Consumer Cyclical
TNA
GDX
-
Real Estate
TNA
GDX
-
Energy
TNA
GDX
-
Basic Materials
TNA
GDX
Utilities
TNA
GDX
-
Communication Services
TNA
GDX
-
Consumer Defensive
TNA
GDX
-
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
TNA vs. GDX — Risk / Return Rank
TNA
GDX
TNA vs. GDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) and VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX). 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 | GDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.97 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.21 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.63 | 1.40 | +2.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.92 | 3.87 | +8.05 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TNA vs. GDX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TNA drawdown since its inception was -88.09%, which is greater than GDX's maximum drawdown of -80.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TNA and GDX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TNA | GDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -88.09% | -80.34% | -7.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.53% | -36.28% | +3.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -65.78% | -36.28% | -29.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -82.36% | -46.51% | -35.85% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -88.09% | -49.79% | -38.30% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -35.23% | -30.91% | -4.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.92% | -40.41% | +6.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.91% | 13.11% | -3.20% |
Volatility
TNA vs. GDX - Volatility Comparison
Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) has a higher volatility of 21.54% compared to VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) at 17.20%. This indicates that TNA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TNA | GDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 21.54% | 17.20% | +4.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 42.61% | 39.15% | +3.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 58.70% | 46.89% | +11.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 67.57% | 36.74% | +30.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 68.54% | 37.34% | +31.20% |
TNA vs. GDX - Expense Ratio Comparison
TNA has a 1.14% expense ratio, which is higher than GDX's 0.51% expense ratio.
Dividends
TNA vs. GDX - Dividend Comparison
TNA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, less than GDX's 0.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF | 0.79% | 0.74% | 1.19% | 1.61% | 1.66% | 1.67% | 0.53% | 0.67% | 0.50% | 0.76% | 0.26% | 0.85% |
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TNA and GDX have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TNA has higher volatility (21.54%) compared to GDX (17.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TNA dropped -88.09% vs GDX's -80.34%.
On 10-year performance, GDX leads with 13.29% vs 8.78% for TNA. On fees, GDX is cheaper at 0.51% per year. On volatility, GDX has been the lower-risk option at 17.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GDX has performed better with a 13.29% return vs 8.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDX is cheaper with a 0.51% expense ratio, compared with 1.14% for TNA.
GDX has the higher dividend yield at 0.79%, compared with 0.39% for TNA.
TNA is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while GDX is Gold. TNA tracks Russell 2000 Index (300%), while GDX tracks NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 1.14% for TNA and 0.51% for GDX.
TNA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs 1.09), 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 TNA and GDX
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