TZA vs. CIFG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

TZA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares) and CIFG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. TZA is passively managed, while CIFG is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.67, they often move in opposite directions. TZA charges 1.11%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CIFG.

Performance

TZA vs. CIFG - 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 CIFR Daily ETF (CIFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TZA achieves a -46.35% return, which is significantly lower than CIFG's 96.56% return.

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%

CIFG

• 1D: -3.87%
• 1M: 42.24%
• YTD: 96.56%
• 6M: 67.07%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TZA vs. CIFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares	-46.35%	9.70%
CIFG Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF	96.56%	-32.52%

Correlation

The correlation between TZA and CIFG is -0.67, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2025	-0.67

Return for Risk

TZA vs. CIFG — 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: 0
TZA Omega Ratio Rank: 1
TZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
TZA Martin Ratio Rank: 1

CIFG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. CIFG - 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 CIFR Daily ETF (CIFG). 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.

	TZA	CIFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.16	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.13	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.77	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-1.00	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.56	—	—

Drawdowns

TZA vs. CIFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TZA drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, which is greater than CIFG's maximum drawdown of -71.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TZA and CIFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	TZA	CIFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-100.00%	-71.71%	-28.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-68.07%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-89.28%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-91.56%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-99.74%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-100.00%	-10.44%	-89.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-97.99%	-35.54%	-62.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	43.46%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	TZA	CIFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.17%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	42.84%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	58.62%	205.93%	-147.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	67.66%	205.93%	-138.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	68.98%	205.93%	-136.95%

TZA vs. CIFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

TZA vs. CIFG - Dividend Comparison

TZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.35%, while CIFG has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CIFG Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TZA and CIFG in my portfolio?

TZA and CIFG have a correlation of -0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, TZA or CIFG?

On fees, CIFG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, TZA or CIFG?

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

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

TZA has the higher dividend yield at 5.35%, compared with 0.00% for CIFG.

What is the main difference between TZA and CIFG?

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