Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

CURE vs RXL: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, CURE finished 3.0 points short and RXL 1.3 points short.

Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3X ETF and ProShares Ultra Health Care, side by side, leveraged ETFs on ETFIQ.

+19.5%CURE returned, 3 months
+14.3%RXL returned, 3 months
−4.4 ptsCURE from its stated multiple
−1.7 ptsRXL from its stated multiple

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score: RXL scores higher

Did it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?

CURE 37RXL 91.70.1, the lowest in this set99.9, the highest

A percentile among the 391 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All leveraged ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed

CURE4.4 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
XLV +8.0% ×3 implies+23.9%CURE returned+19.5%XLV +8.0% ×3 implies+23.9%CURE returned+19.5%
RXL1.7 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
XLV +8.0% ×2 implies+16.0%RXL returned+14.3%XLV +8.0% ×2 implies+16.0%RXL returned+14.3%

Performance, window by window

CURE and RXL over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnMultiple would giveDifference
CURERXLCURERXLCURERXL
1 month−7.0%−4.3%−5.5%−3.7%−1.5 pts−0.6 pts
3 months+19.5%+14.3%+23.9%+16.0%−4.4 pts−1.7 pts
6 months+25.4%+18.8%+34.0%+22.7%−8.6 pts−3.9 pts
1 year+46.5%+33.6%+61.2%+40.8%−14.7 pts−7.2 pts
3 years+30.8%+33.7%+92.7%+61.8%−61.9 pts−28.1 pts
Since launch+2637.9%+1823.7%not meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningful
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
CURE and RXL on the same fields, as of Sep 11, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CURE
Direxion Daily Healthcare Bull 3X ETF
Aims to return three times the daily move of health care (XLV)
RXL
ProShares Ultra Health Care
Aims to return twice the daily move of health care (XLV)
IssuerDirexionProShares
Sets out to return+3x+2x
OnXLVXLV
Segmentsectorsector
Fund returned, 3 months+19.5%+14.3%
Underlying returned, 3 months+8.0%+8.0%
What the stated multiple implies, 3 months+23.9%+16.0%
Difference from stated, 3 months−4.4 pts−1.7 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch+46.5%+33.6%
Difference from stated, over that window−14.7 pts−7.2 pts
Underlying volatility19%19%
Difference over the days both have tradedno shared window−1.7 pts
Expense ratio0.94%0.95%
LaunchedJun 15, 2011Jan 4, 2010

CURE in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: CURE returned +19.5% where its own daily promise gave +22.5%, 3.0 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +3 times XLV's 8.0% implies +23.9%, which makes CURE look 4.4 points short. 1.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. CURE aims to return +3 times XLV's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +3 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more. XLV moved at 19% annualized over that window. That is what decides how far the two figures separate: the same fund on a calm underlying and a violent one is a different product.

RXL in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: RXL returned +14.3% where its own daily promise gave +15.5%, 1.3 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times XLV's 8.0% implies +16.0%, which makes RXL look 1.7 points short. 0.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. RXL aims to return +2 times XLV's move each day, then resets. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +2 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, CURE or RXL?
Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, CURE finished 4.4 points from what its multiple implies and RXL finished 1.7 points from its own, so RXL came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are CURE and RXL levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on health care, CURE at +3 times and RXL at +2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, CURE or RXL?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window CURE’s moved at 19% annualized and RXL’s at 19%, so CURE has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold CURE or RXL for a year?
Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.
Which is cheaper, CURE or RXL?
CURE charges 0.94% a year and RXL charges 0.95%, so CURE is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

CURE against RXL, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 11, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, CURE against RXL, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/CURE-RXL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources