YINN vs. BULZ

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

YINN (Direxion Daily China 3x Bull Shares) and BULZ (MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - YINN tracks the FTSE China 50 Index (300%) while BULZ tracks the Solactive FANG Innovation. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, YINN returned -6.43%/yr vs 77.02%/yr for BULZ. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. YINN charges 1.52%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BULZ.

Performance

YINN vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily China 3x Bull Shares (YINN) and MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, YINN achieves a -29.95% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 54.96% return.

YINN

• 1D: 3.08%
• 1M: -23.37%
• YTD: -29.95%
• 6M: -32.53%
• 1Y: -27.68%
• 3Y*: -6.43%
• 5Y*: -38.50%
• 10Y*: -18.37%

BULZ

• 1D: 2.00%
• 1M: -11.00%
• YTD: 54.96%
• 6M: 57.61%
• 1Y: 163.08%
• 3Y*: 77.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

YINN vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
YINN Direxion Daily China 3x Bull Shares	-29.95%	54.21%	36.06%	-53.08%	-71.97%	-24.41%
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	54.96%	60.09%	54.09%	394.22%	-92.26%	9.17%

Correlation

The correlation between YINN and BULZ 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2021	0.40

YINN vs. BULZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	YINN	BULZ
Financial Services	34.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	27.4%	12.8%
Communication Services	15.7%	25.0%
Energy	5.6%	-
Technology	5.5%	62.3%
Basic Materials	4.2%	-
Industrials	2.4%	-
Healthcare	2.3%	-
Real Estate	1.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.9%	-
Utilities	0.4%	-

Return for Risk

YINN vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

YINN

YINN Risk / Return Rank: 6
YINN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
YINN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
YINN Omega Ratio Rank: 6
YINN Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
YINN Martin Ratio Rank: 5

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 63
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 59
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

YINN vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily China 3x Bull Shares (YINN) and MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ). 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.

	YINN	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.47	2.12	-2.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.36	2.36	-2.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.32	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.56	3.03	-3.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.09	7.94	-9.03

YINN vs. BULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current YINN Sharpe Ratio is -0.47, which is lower than the BULZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of YINN and BULZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

YINN vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum YINN drawdown since its inception was -98.87%, roughly equal to the maximum BULZ drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for YINN and BULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	YINN	BULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.87%	-94.44%	-4.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-49.61%	-54.22%	+4.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-69.08%	-67.96%	-1.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-96.28%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-98.59%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-97.52%	-26.99%	-70.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-68.51%	-58.18%	-10.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	25.53%	20.62%	+4.91%

Volatility

YINN vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Direxion Daily China 3x Bull Shares (YINN) is 18.63%, while MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) has a volatility of 30.02%. This indicates that YINN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BULZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	YINN	BULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	18.63%	30.02%	-11.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	42.54%	61.86%	-19.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	58.74%	77.55%	-18.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	94.19%	91.54%	+2.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	81.73%	91.54%	-9.81%

YINN vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

YINN has a 1.52% expense ratio, which is higher than BULZ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

YINN vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison

YINN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, while BULZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
YINN Direxion Daily China 3x Bull Shares	1.42%	1.12%	1.81%	4.17%	1.16%	0.73%	0.76%	1.38%	1.02%	1.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both YINN and BULZ in my portfolio?

YINN and BULZ 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.

Which is riskier, YINN or BULZ?

BULZ has higher volatility (30.02%) compared to YINN (18.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, YINN dropped -98.87% vs BULZ's -94.44%.

Which ETF is better, YINN or BULZ?

On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 77.02% vs -6.43% for YINN. On fees, BULZ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, YINN has been the lower-risk option at 18.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, YINN or BULZ?

Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 77.02% return vs -6.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, YINN or BULZ?

BULZ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.52% for YINN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, YINN or BULZ?

YINN has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 0.00% for BULZ.

What is the main difference between YINN and BULZ?

YINN tracks FTSE China 50 Index (300%), while BULZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.52% for YINN and 0.95% for BULZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BULZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs -0.47), 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.