UMDD vs. FAS

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

UMDD (ProShares UltraPro MidCap400) and FAS (Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares) are both Leveraged Equities funds - UMDD tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Index (300%) while FAS tracks the Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UMDD returned 11.46%/yr vs 19.57%/yr for FAS. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. UMDD charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for FAS.

Performance

UMDD vs. FAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMDD achieves a 31.54% return, which is significantly higher than FAS's -19.73% return. Over the past 10 years, UMDD has underperformed FAS with an annualized return of 11.46%, while FAS has yielded a comparatively higher 19.57% annualized return.

UMDD

• 1D: 0.43%
• 1M: -0.66%
• YTD: 31.54%
• 6M: 30.82%
• 1Y: 55.88%
• 3Y*: 22.44%
• 5Y*: 1.30%
• 10Y*: 11.46%

FAS

• 1D: -1.75%
• 1M: 3.08%
• YTD: -19.73%
• 6M: -13.42%
• 1Y: -7.77%
• 3Y*: 35.48%
• 5Y*: 5.32%
• 10Y*: 19.57%

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

UMDD vs. FAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UMDD ProShares UltraPro MidCap400	31.54%	-2.57%	19.68%	27.21%	-49.60%	72.27%	-17.30%	78.90%	-40.29%	49.17%
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares	-19.73%	21.48%	84.47%	14.92%	-43.19%	116.59%	-34.97%	113.04%	-33.84%	67.37%

Correlation

The correlation between UMDD and FAS is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 12, 2010	0.83

The correlation between UMDD and FAS shifts across timeframes, from 0.64 (1 year) to 0.83 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

UMDD vs. FAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UMDD	FAS
Industrials	13.4%	0.2%
Technology	9.0%	1.7%
Financial Services	7.1%	98.0%
Consumer Cyclical	5.1%	-
Healthcare	4.8%	-
Real Estate	3.9%	-
Energy	2.7%	-
Basic Materials	2.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	-
Utilities	1.6%	-
Communication Services	0.5%	-

Return for Risk

UMDD vs. FAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

UMDD

UMDD Risk / Return Rank: 42
UMDD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
UMDD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
UMDD Omega Ratio Rank: 37
UMDD Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
UMDD Martin Ratio Rank: 48

FAS

FAS Risk / Return Rank: 8
FAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
FAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FAS Omega Ratio Rank: 8
FAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
FAS Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

UMDD vs. FAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS). 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.

	UMDD	FAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.20	-0.18	+1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	0.04	+1.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.01	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.16	-0.19	+2.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.21	-0.44	+7.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UMDD vs. FAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMDD Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is higher than the FAS Sharpe Ratio of -0.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMDD and FAS, 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

	UMDD	FAS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.20	-0.18	+1.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02	0.10	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.18	0.32	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	0.20	+0.12

Drawdowns

UMDD vs. FAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMDD drawdown since its inception was -86.24%, smaller than the maximum FAS drawdown of -91.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMDD and FAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMDD	FAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.24%	-91.61%	+5.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.04%	-40.88%	+14.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-60.33%	-43.10%	-17.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-64.61%	-66.88%	+2.27%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-86.24%	-85.99%	-0.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.91%	-26.35%	+16.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.60%	-31.11%	+7.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.78%	17.73%	-9.95%

Volatility

UMDD vs. FAS - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares (FAS) have volatilities of 12.43% and 12.20%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMDD	FAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.43%	12.20%	+0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.70%	33.21%	+1.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.01%	43.36%	+3.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	58.96%	55.59%	+3.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	62.31%	61.35%	+0.96%

UMDD vs. FAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

UMDD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than FAS's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

UMDD vs. FAS - Dividend Comparison

UMDD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, less than FAS's 10.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FAS Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X Shares	10.39%	8.21%	0.76%	1.77%	0.91%	0.60%	0.47%	0.62%	1.43%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%
UMDD ProShares UltraPro MidCap400	0.80%	1.00%	0.76%	0.19%	0.49%	0.06%	0.08%	0.64%	0.32%	0.00%	0.03%	0.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UMDD and FAS in my portfolio?

UMDD and FAS have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UMDD or FAS?

UMDD has higher volatility (12.43%) compared to FAS (12.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMDD dropped -86.24% vs FAS's -91.61%.

Which ETF is better, UMDD or FAS?

On 10-year performance, FAS leads with 19.57% vs 11.46% for UMDD. On fees, UMDD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, FAS has been the lower-risk option at 12.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UMDD or FAS?

Over the 10-year period, FAS has performed better with a 19.57% return vs 11.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UMDD or FAS?

UMDD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for FAS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UMDD or FAS?

FAS has the higher dividend yield at 10.39%, compared with 0.80% for UMDD.

What is the main difference between UMDD and FAS?

UMDD tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (300%), while FAS tracks Russell 1000 Financial Services Index (300%). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for UMDD and 1.00% for FAS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UMDD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.20 vs -0.18), 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.