Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

TNA vs URTY: which held to its multiple?

Over the days both have traded, TNA finished 3.5 points from its stated multiple and URTY 3.6.

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

−6.9%TNA returned, 3 months
−7.0%URTY returned, 3 months
−3.5 ptsTNA from its stated multiple
−3.6 ptsURTY from its stated multiple

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score: TNA scores higher

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

TNA 65.5URTY 59.50.1, 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%
URTY3.6 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
IWM −1.1% ×3 implies−3.5%URTY returned−7.0%IWM −1.1% ×3 implies−3.5%URTY returned−7.0%

Performance, window by window

TNA and URTY over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnMultiple would giveDifference
TNAURTYTNAURTYTNAURTY
1 month−14.2%−14.2%−13.7%−13.7%−0.5 pts−0.5 pts
3 months−6.9%−7.0%−3.5%−3.5%−3.5 pts−3.6 pts
6 months+48.1%+47.6%+52.9%+52.9%−4.8 pts−5.3 pts
1 year+45.8%+45.2%+63.7%+63.7%−17.9 pts−18.4 pts
3 years+104.9%+102.7%+187.6%+187.6%−82.7 pts−84.9 pts
Since launch+506.0%+654.0%not meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningfulnot meaningful
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
TNA and URTY 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
URTY
ProShares UltraPro Russell2000
Aims to return three times the daily move of the Russell 2000
IssuerDirexionProShares
Sets out to return+3x+3x
OnIWMIWM
Segmentus small capus small cap
Fund returned, 3 months−6.9%−7.0%
Underlying returned, 3 months−1.1%−1.1%
What the stated multiple implies, 3 months−3.5%−3.5%
Difference from stated, 3 months−3.5 pts−3.6 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch+45.8%+45.2%
Difference from stated, over that window−17.9 pts−18.4 pts
Underlying volatility14%14%
Difference over the days both have traded−3.5 pts−3.6 pts
Expense ratio1.05%0.95%
LaunchedJan 4, 2010Feb 11, 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.

URTY in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: URTY returned −7.0% where its own daily promise gave −4.7%, 2.3 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +3 times IWM's −1.1% implies −3.5%, which makes URTY look 3.6 points short. URTY aims to return +3 times IWM's move each day, then resets.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, TNA or URTY?
Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, TNA finished 3.5 points from what its multiple implies and URTY finished 3.6 points from its own, so TNA came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are TNA and URTY levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on the Russell 2000, TNA at +3 times and URTY at +3 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, TNA or URTY?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window TNA’s moved at 14% annualized and URTY’s at 14%, so TNA has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold TNA or URTY 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 URTY?
TNA charges 1.05% a year and URTY charges 0.95%, so URTY 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 URTY, 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 URTY, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/TNA-URTY Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources