Which came closer to its stated multiple, FAS or FAZ?

Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FAS finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and FAZ finished 1.6 points from its own, so FAZ came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.

Are FAS and FAZ levered on the same thing?

Yes. Both are levered on financials, FAS at +3 times and FAZ at -3 times the daily move.

Which one decays faster, FAS or FAZ?

Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FAS’s moved at 13% annualized and FAZ’s at 13%, so FAS has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.

Can I hold FAS or FAZ 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, FAS or FAZ?

FAS charges 0.88% a year and FAZ charges 1.03%, so FAS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Share on X Download as PDF Open live

FAS vs FAZ: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, FAS finished 2.4 points short and FAZ 4.0 points over. Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF and Direxion Daily Financial Bear 3X ETF.

−9.9%

FAS returned, 3 months

+8.1%

FAZ returned, 3 months

−3.4 pts

FAS from its stated multiple

+1.6 pts

FAZ from its stated multiple

FAS · 3 months to Sep 30, 20263.4 pts short of its stated multiple

FAS returned −9.9% while 3 times XLF's move would have been −6.5%

FAZ · 3 months to Sep 30, 20261.6 pts ahead of its stated multiple

FAZ returned +8.1% while −3 times XLF's move would have been +6.5%

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score · FAZ scores higherDid it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?

FAS among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months

FAS 58.9

0.1, the lowest in this set99.9, the highest

FAZ among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months

FAZ 93.6

0.4, the lowest in this set99.6, the highest

A percentile among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months. FAZ is a percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months, a different set, so the two marks are not on one scale. 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 →

Performance, window by window

	Total return		Multiple would give		Difference
Window	FAS	FAZ	FAS	FAZ	FAS	FAZ
1 month	−21.0%	+25.2%	−21.4%	+21.4%	+0.4 pts	+3.8 pts
3 months	−9.9%	+8.1%	−6.5%	+6.5%	−3.4 pts	+1.6 pts
6 months	+19.7%	−20.8%	+26.3%	−26.3%	−6.6 pts	+5.5 pts
1 year	−13.6%	+0.2%	+2.0%	−2.0%	−15.6 pts	+2.2 pts
3 years	+167.6%	−77.8%	+205.8%	−205.8%	−38.2 pts	+128.0 pts
Since launch FAS Jan 2010 · FAZ Jan 2010	+1454.0%	−100.0%	not meaningful	not meaningful	not meaningful	not meaningful

FAS and FAZ over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →

On the same fields

FAS

Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF · Aims to return three times the daily move of financials (XLF)

FAZ

Direxion Daily Financial Bear 3X ETF · Aims to return three times the opposite of the daily move of financials (XLF)

Issuer Direxion Direxion

Sets out to return +3x -3x

Underlying asset XLF XLF

Segment sector sector

Fund returned, 3 months or since launch −9.9% +8.1%

Underlying returned, over that window −2.2% −2.2%

What the stated multiple implies, over that window −6.5% +6.5%

Difference from stated, over that window −3.4 pts +1.6 pts

Fund returned, 1 year or since launch −13.6% +0.2%

Difference from stated, over that window −15.6 pts +2.2 pts

Underlying volatility 13% 13%

Expense ratio 0.88% 1.03%

Launched Jan 4, 2010 Jan 4, 2010

Net assets $1.9bn $96m

FAS and FAZ on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

FAS in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: FAS returned −9.9% where its own daily promise gave −7.6%, 2.4 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 3 times XLF's −2.2% implies −6.5%, which makes FAS look 3.4 points short. 1.0 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. FAS aims to return +3 times XLF'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. XLF moved at 13% 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.

FAZ in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: FAZ returned +8.1% where its own daily promise gave +4.2%, 4.0 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −3 times XLF's −2.2% implies +6.5%, which makes FAZ look 1.6 points over. 2.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. FAZ aims to return -3 times XLF'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, FAS or FAZ?: Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FAS finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and FAZ finished 1.6 points from its own, so FAZ came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are FAS and FAZ levered on the same thing?: Yes. Both are levered on financials, FAS at +3 times and FAZ at -3 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, FAS or FAZ?: Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FAS’s moved at 13% annualized and FAZ’s at 13%, so FAS has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold FAS or FAZ 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, FAS or FAZ?: FAS charges 0.88% a year and FAZ charges 1.03%, so FAS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

FAS vs SEF FAS vs SKF FAS vs UYG FAS vs XLFX FAZ vs SEF FAZ vs SKF FAZ vs UYG FAZ vs XLFX

XLF →FAS on its own →FAZ on its own →How every figure is computed →Standards and sources →

Where these figures came from

FAS and FAZ filings on SEC EDGAR ↗FAS and FAZ prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Direxion website ↗

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

Cite this page

ETFIQ, FAS against FAZ, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/fas-vs-faz

Open data

Free to use with attribution. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology.