Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

TNA vs TWM: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, TNA finished 2.2 points short and TWM 2.3 points over.

Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X ETF and ProShares UltraShort Russell2000, side by side, leveraged ETFs on ETFIQ.

−6.9%TNA returned, 3 months
+3.3%TWM returned, 3 months
−3.5 ptsTNA from its stated multiple
+1.0 ptsTWM from its stated multiple

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score: TWM scores higher

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

TNA 65.5TWM 72.70.1, 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

TNA3.5 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
IWM −1.1% ×3 implies−3.5%TNA returned−6.9%IWM −1.1% ×3 implies−3.5%TNA returned−6.9%
TWM1 pt over its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
IWM −1.1% ×2 implies+2.3%TWM returned+3.3%IWM −1.1% ×2 implies+2.3%TWM returned+3.3%

Performance, window by window

TNA and TWM over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnMultiple would giveDifference
TNATWMTNATWMTNATWM
1 month−14.2%+10.3%−13.7%+9.1%−0.5 pts+1.1 pts
3 months−6.9%+3.3%−3.5%+2.3%−3.5 pts+1.0 pts
6 months+48.1%−28.0%+52.9%−35.3%−4.8 pts+7.3 pts
1 year+45.8%−32.4%+63.7%−42.4%−17.9 pts+10.0 pts
3 years+104.9%−64.2%+187.6%−125.1%−82.7 pts+60.8 pts
Since launch+506.0%−99.7%not meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningful
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
TNA and TWM on the same fields, as of Sep 11, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
TNA
Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X ETF
Aims to return three times the daily move of the Russell 2000
TWM
ProShares UltraShort Russell2000
Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of the Russell 2000
IssuerDirexionProShares
Sets out to return+3x-2x
OnIWMIWM
Segmentus small capus small cap
Fund returned, 3 months−6.9%+3.3%
Underlying returned, 3 months−1.1%−1.1%
What the stated multiple implies, 3 months−3.5%+2.3%
Difference from stated, 3 months−3.5 pts+1.0 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch+45.8%−32.4%
Difference from stated, over that window−17.9 pts+10.0 pts
Underlying volatility14%14%
Difference over the days both have traded−3.5 ptsno shared window
Expense ratio1.05%0.95%
LaunchedJan 4, 2010Jan 4, 2010

TNA in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: TNA returned −6.9% where its own daily promise gave −4.7%, 2.2 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +3 times IWM's −1.1% implies −3.5%, which makes TNA look 3.5 points short. 1.3 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. TNA aims to return +3 times IWM'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. IWM moved at 14% 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.

TWM in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: TWM returned +3.3% where its own daily promise gave +0.9%, 2.3 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times IWM's −1.1% implies +2.3%, which makes TWM look 1.0 points over. 1.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. TWM aims to return -2 times IWM'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, TNA or TWM?
Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, TNA finished 3.5 points from what its multiple implies and TWM finished 1.0 points from its own, so TWM came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are TNA and TWM levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on the Russell 2000, TNA at +3 times and TWM at -2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, TNA or TWM?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window TNA’s moved at 14% annualized and TWM’s at 14%, so TNA has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold TNA or TWM 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, TNA or TWM?
TNA charges 1.05% a year and TWM charges 0.95%, so TWM 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.

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

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources