FXP vs YINN: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, FXP finished 2.8 points over and YINN 3.7 points short. ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 and Direxion Daily FTSE China Bull 3X ETF.

−10.8%
FXP returned, 3 months
+14.2%
YINN returned, 3 months
+2.0 pts
FXP from its stated multiple
−5.0 pts
YINN from its stated multiple
FXP · 3 months to Sep 30, 20262 pts ahead of its stated multiple
2 pts ahead of its stated multipleFXP returned −10.8% while −2 times FXI's move would have been −12.8%FXI +6.4% ×−2 implies−12.8%FXP returned−10.8%2 pts ahead of its stated multipleFXP returned −10.8% while −2 times FXI's move would have been −12.8%FXI +6.4% ×−2 implies−12.8%FXP returned−10.8%

FXP returned −10.8% while −2 times FXI's move would have been −12.8%

YINN · 3 months to Sep 30, 20265 pts short of its stated multiple
5 pts short of its stated multipleYINN returned +14.2% while 3 times FXI's move would have been +19.2%FXI +6.4% ×3 implies+19.2%YINN returned+14.2%5 pts short of its stated multipleYINN returned +14.2% while 3 times FXI's move would have been +19.2%FXI +6.4% ×3 implies+19.2%YINN returned+14.2%

YINN returned +14.2% while 3 times FXI's move would have been +19.2%

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

FXP among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months

FXP 79.6
0.4, the lowest in this set99.6, the highest

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

YINN 28
0.1, the lowest in this set99.9, the highest

A percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months. YINN is a percentile among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, 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 returnMultiple would giveDifference
WindowFXPYINNFXPYINNFXPYINN
1 month+8.8%−12.7%+7.6%−11.5%+1.2 pts−1.2 pts
3 months−10.8%+14.2%−12.8%+19.2%+2.0 pts−5.0 pts
6 months+7.1%−19.7%+7.2%−10.8%−0.1 pts−8.9 pts
1 year+37.1%−52.5%+31.5%−47.3%+5.6 pts−5.2 pts
3 years−64.1%−6.7%−76.7%+115.1%+12.6 pts−121.8 pts
Since launch
FXP Jan 2010 · YINN Jan 2010
−98.0%−96.3%−33.8%+50.7%−64.2 pts−147.0 pts

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

On the same fields

FXP
ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 · Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of iShares China Large-Cap ETF (FXI)
YINN
Direxion Daily FTSE China Bull 3X ETF · Aims to return three times the daily move of iShares China Large-Cap ETF (FXI)
Issuer ProShares Direxion
Sets out to return -2x +3x
Underlying asset FXI FXI
Segment country country
Fund returned, 3 months or since launch −10.8% +14.2%
Underlying returned, over that window +6.4% +6.4%
What the stated multiple implies, over that window −12.8% +19.2%
Difference from stated, over that window +2.0 pts −5.0 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch +37.1% −52.5%
Difference from stated, over that window +5.6 pts −5.2 pts
Underlying volatility 17% 17%
Expense ratio 0.95% 1.34%
Launched Jan 4, 2010 Jan 4, 2010
Net assets $6m $583m

FXP and YINN on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

FXP in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: FXP returned −10.8% where its own daily promise gave −13.7%, 2.8 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times FXI's 6.4% implies −12.8%, which makes FXP look 2.0 points over. 0.8 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. FXP aims to return -2 times FXI'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. FXI moved at 17% 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.

YINN in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: YINN returned +14.2% where its own daily promise gave +17.9%, 3.7 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 3 times FXI's 6.4% implies +19.2%, which makes YINN look 5.0 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. YINN aims to return +3 times FXI'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, FXP or YINN?
Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FXP finished 2.0 points from what its multiple implies and YINN finished 5.0 points from its own, so FXP came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are FXP and YINN levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on iShares China Large-Cap ETF, FXP at -2 times and YINN at +3 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, FXP or YINN?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FXP’s moved at 17% annualized and YINN’s at 17%, so FXP has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold FXP or YINN 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, FXP or YINN?
FXP charges 0.95% a year and YINN charges 1.34%, so FXP is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Cite this page

ETFIQ, FXP against YINN, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/fxp-vs-yinn

Open data

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