TWM vs. TZA
TWM (ProShares UltraShort Russell2000) and TZA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares) are both Leveraged Equities funds - TWM tracks the Russell 2000 (-200%) while TZA tracks the Russell 2000 Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, TWM returned -28.49%/yr vs -44.17%/yr for TZA. With a 1.00 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. TWM charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.11%/yr for TZA.
Performance
TWM vs. TZA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TWM achieves a -32.09% return, which is significantly higher than TZA's -46.35% return. Over the past 10 years, TWM has outperformed TZA with an annualized return of -28.49%, while TZA has yielded a comparatively lower -44.17% annualized return.
TWM
- 1D
- 1.98%
- 1M
- -7.68%
- YTD
- -32.09%
- 6M
- -28.69%
- 1Y
- -50.37%
- 3Y*
- -30.94%
- 5Y*
- -17.34%
- 10Y*
- -28.49%
TZA
- 1D
- 2.05%
- 1M
- -12.69%
- YTD
- -46.35%
- 6M
- -42.28%
- 1Y
- -67.58%
- 3Y*
- -46.88%
- 5Y*
- -30.52%
- 10Y*
- -44.17%
TWM vs. TZA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TWM ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 | -32.09% | -24.71% | -19.35% | -26.84% | 28.43% | -35.43% | -60.01% | -38.40% | 19.15% | -26.36% |
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares | -46.35% | -40.22% | -32.22% | -41.19% | 30.21% | -50.80% | -80.43% | -53.25% | 25.06% | -38.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between TWM and TZA is 1.00 - 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.00 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 1.00 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.00 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 1.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2008 | 1.00 |
The correlation between TWM and TZA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 1.00 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
TWM vs. TZA — Risk / Return Rank
TWM
TZA
TWM vs. TZA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM) and Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA). 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.
| TWM | TZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.06 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.78 | 0.77 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.99 | -1.00 | +0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.64 | -1.56 | -0.08 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TWM vs. TZA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TWM drawdown since its inception was -99.94%, roughly equal to the maximum TZA drawdown of -100.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TWM and TZA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TWM | TZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.94% | -100.00% | +0.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -51.15% | -68.07% | +16.92% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -74.07% | -89.28% | +15.21% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -76.44% | -91.56% | +15.12% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -96.79% | -99.74% | +2.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.93% | -100.00% | +0.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -87.29% | -97.99% | +10.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 30.89% | 43.46% | -12.57% |
Volatility
TWM vs. TZA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 (TWM) is 13.21%, while Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA) has a volatility of 19.17%. This indicates that TWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TZA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TWM | TZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.21% | 19.17% | -5.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.79% | 42.84% | -14.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.41% | 58.62% | -19.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 45.25% | 67.66% | -22.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 45.84% | 68.98% | -23.14% |
TWM vs. TZA - Expense Ratio Comparison
TWM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than TZA's 1.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
TWM vs. TZA - Dividend Comparison
TWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.67%, more than TZA's 5.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TWM ProShares UltraShort Russell2000 | 6.67% | 5.36% | 6.21% | 4.72% | 0.17% | 0.00% | 0.41% | 1.49% | 0.73% | 0.05% |
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares | 5.35% | 5.08% | 5.40% | 5.49% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.21% | 1.56% | 0.63% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 1.00, TWM and TZA 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.
TZA has higher volatility (19.17%) compared to TWM (13.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TWM dropped -99.94% vs TZA's -100.00%.
On 10-year performance, TWM leads with -28.49% vs -44.17% for TZA. On fees, TWM is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, TWM has been the lower-risk option at 13.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, TWM has performed better with a -28.49% return vs -44.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TWM is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.11% for TZA.
TWM has the higher dividend yield at 6.67%, compared with 5.35% for TZA.
TWM tracks Russell 2000 (-200%), while TZA tracks Russell 2000 Index (-300%). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for TWM and 1.11% for TZA.
TZA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.16 vs -1.28), 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 TWM and TZA
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