Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

ROM vs TECS: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, ROM finished 1.2 points short and TECS 3.0 points over.

ProShares Ultra Technology and Direxion Daily Technology Bear 3X ETF, side by side, leveraged ETFs on ETFIQ.

−0.1%ROM returned, 3 months
−14.3%TECS returned, 3 months
−3.4 ptsROM from its stated multiple
−9.3 ptsTECS from its stated multiple

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score: ROM scores higher

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

ROM 94TECS 86.40.1, 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

ROM3.4 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
XLK +1.7% ×2 implies+3.3%ROM returned−0.1%XLK +1.7% ×2 implies+3.3%ROM returned−0.1%
TECS9.3 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
XLK +1.7% ×3 implies−5.0%TECS returned−14.3%XLK +1.7% ×3 implies−5.0%TECS returned−14.3%

Performance, window by window

ROM and TECS over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnMultiple would giveDifference
ROMTECSROMTECSROMTECS
1 month−2.0%+1.1%−1.3%+1.9%−0.8 pts−0.8 pts
3 months−0.1%−14.3%+3.3%−5.0%−3.4 pts−9.3 pts
6 months+76.0%−68.9%+75.0%−112.6%+1.0 pts+43.7 pts
1 year+71.2%−71.8%+78.4%−117.6%−7.2 pts+45.8 pts
3 years+247.6%−95.4%not meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningful
Since launch+8661.6%−100.0%not meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningful
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
ROM and TECS on the same fields, as of Sep 11, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ROM
ProShares Ultra Technology
Aims to return twice the daily move of technology (XLK)
TECS
Direxion Daily Technology Bear 3X ETF
Aims to return three times the opposite of the daily move of technology (XLK)
IssuerProSharesDirexion
Sets out to return+2x-3x
OnXLKXLK
Segmentsectorsector
Fund returned, 3 months−0.1%−14.3%
Underlying returned, 3 months+1.7%+1.7%
What the stated multiple implies, 3 months+3.3%−5.0%
Difference from stated, 3 months−3.4 pts−9.3 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch+71.2%−71.8%
Difference from stated, over that window−7.2 pts+45.8 pts
Underlying volatility30%30%
Difference over the days both have traded−3.4 ptsno shared window
Expense ratio0.95%1.01%
LaunchedJan 4, 2010Jan 4, 2010

ROM in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: ROM returned −0.1% where its own daily promise gave +1.1%, 1.2 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times XLK's 1.7% implies +3.3%, which makes ROM look 3.4 points short. 2.3 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. ROM aims to return +2 times XLK's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. 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. XLK moved at 30% 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.

TECS in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: TECS returned −14.3% where its own daily promise gave −17.3%, 3.0 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −3 times XLK's 1.7% implies −5.0%, which makes TECS look 9.3 points short. 12.3 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. TECS aims to return -3 times XLK's move each day, then resets. 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.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, ROM or TECS?
Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, ROM finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and TECS finished 9.3 points from its own, so ROM came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are ROM and TECS levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on technology, ROM at +2 times and TECS at -3 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, ROM or TECS?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window ROM’s moved at 30% annualized and TECS’s at 30%, so ROM has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold ROM or TECS 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, ROM or TECS?
ROM charges 0.95% a year and TECS charges 1.01%, so ROM 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.

ROM against TECS, 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, ROM against TECS, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/ROM-TECS Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources