TZA vs. ARMG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TZA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares) and ARMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long ARM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. TZA is passively managed, while ARMG is actively managed. Over the past year, TZA returned -65.59% vs 510.84% for ARMG. At a correlation of -0.53, they often move in opposite directions. TZA charges 1.11%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for ARMG.

Performance

TZA vs. ARMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA) and Leverage Shares 2X Long ARM Daily ETF (ARMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TZA achieves a -40.43% return, which is significantly lower than ARMG's 936.32% return.

TZA

• 1D: 3.75%
• 1M: -10.87%
• YTD: -40.43%
• 6M: -38.50%
• 1Y: -65.59%
• 3Y*: -44.69%
• 5Y*: -30.11%
• 10Y*: -43.15%

ARMG

• 1D: 4.85%
• 1M: 261.28%
• YTD: 936.32%
• 6M: 526.62%
• 1Y: 510.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TZA vs. ARMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares	-40.43%	-41.26%
ARMG Leverage Shares 2X Long ARM Daily ETF	936.32%	-61.80%

Correlation

The correlation between TZA and ARMG is -0.46, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2025	-0.53

The correlation between TZA and ARMG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.53 to -0.46 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

TZA vs. ARMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

TZA

TZA Risk / Return Rank: 1
TZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
TZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
TZA Omega Ratio Rank: 1
TZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
TZA Martin Ratio Rank: 1

ARMG

ARMG Risk / Return Rank: 84
ARMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
ARMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
ARMG Omega Ratio Rank: 77
ARMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
ARMG Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

TZA vs. ARMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA) and Leverage Shares 2X Long ARM Daily ETF (ARMG). 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.

	TZA	ARMG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-1.16	3.96	-5.11
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-2.07	3.63	-5.71
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	1.46	-0.69
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.98	7.56	-8.54
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.51	13.34	-14.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TZA vs. ARMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TZA Sharpe Ratio is -1.16, which is lower than the ARMG Sharpe Ratio of 3.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TZA and ARMG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TZA	ARMG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.16	3.96	-5.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.45	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.63	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.71	1.24	-1.96

Drawdowns

TZA vs. ARMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TZA drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, which is greater than ARMG's maximum drawdown of -80.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TZA and ARMG.

Drawdown Indicators

	TZA	ARMG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-100.00%	-80.28%	-19.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-67.28%	-68.13%	+0.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-88.34%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-90.83%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-99.71%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-100.00%	0.00%	-100.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-98.00%	-53.04%	-44.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	43.51%	38.55%	+4.96%

Volatility

TZA vs. ARMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA) is 17.03%, while Leverage Shares 2X Long ARM Daily ETF (ARMG) has a volatility of 64.57%. This indicates that TZA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ARMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TZA	ARMG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.03%	64.57%	-47.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.64%	103.90%	-63.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	57.05%	130.31%	-73.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	67.43%	138.30%	-70.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	68.91%	138.30%	-69.39%

TZA vs. ARMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

TZA has a 1.11% expense ratio, which is higher than ARMG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

TZA vs. ARMG - Dividend Comparison

TZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.82%, more than ARMG's 0.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ARMG Leverage Shares 2X Long ARM Daily ETF	0.47%	4.86%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares	4.82%	5.08%	5.40%	5.49%	0.00%	0.00%	1.21%	1.56%	0.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TZA and ARMG in my portfolio?

TZA and ARMG have a correlation of -0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TZA or ARMG?

ARMG has higher volatility (64.57%) compared to TZA (17.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TZA dropped -100.00% vs ARMG's -80.28%.

Which ETF is better, TZA or ARMG?

On 1-year performance, ARMG leads with 510.84% vs -65.59% for TZA. On fees, ARMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, TZA has been the lower-risk option at 17.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TZA or ARMG?

Over the 1-year period, ARMG has performed better with a 510.84% return vs -65.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TZA or ARMG?

ARMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.11% for TZA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TZA or ARMG?

TZA has the higher dividend yield at 4.82%, compared with 0.47% for ARMG.

What is the main difference between TZA and ARMG?

They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.11% for TZA and 0.75% for ARMG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ARMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.96 vs -1.16), 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.