FAS ranks 3rd and TMF 5th of 30 funds in the 3x Leveraged Long Category.
FAS vs TMF
FAS −0.02pt a year
0.88%0.90%
TMF 13.9×the volume
413K5.73M
FAS +38.1pt
+20.9%−17.2%
FAS vs TMF Performance
+31.4%−87.8%
- FAS 0.88%, better
- TMF 0.90%
- FAS $2.17B
- TMF $1.95B
- FAS +12.3%, better
- TMF −25.0%
- FAS 8.87%, better
- TMF 4.68%
- FAS 87
- TMF 14
- FAS 413K sh
- TMF 5.73M sh, better
- FAS $168.18
- TMF $29.47
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | FAS | TMF |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A92Higher | A87 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | B69Higher | C49 |
| Tradability | A73 | A79Higher |
| Holdings | A100 | |
| Durability | B66Higher | B65 |
Rank among 3x Leveraged Long funds
Same Category. FAS and TMF are both graded against the same 30 3x Leveraged Long funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
FASA
TMFA
In short
FAS Born in November 2008 with the banking system on fire, FAS aims to deliver three times the daily move of the Financial Select Sector Index. A one-day tool on roughly 80 financial stocks, built around a single-day objective.
TMF Three times the daily move of long-dated Treasuries, reset every day. Where most 3x funds aim at stocks, TMF points its leverage at the 20-year-plus end of the curve, and has been doing it since 2009.
Stated mandate
FAS The fund seeks a daily return equal to three times the performance of the Financial Select Sector Index, before fees and expenses. It is designed for a single-day objective rather than a multiple of the index’s cumulative return over longer periods.
TMF The Fund seeks pre-fee and expense investment results equal to 300% of the daily performance of the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. It is designed for a single trading day, and longer-period results may differ because daily returns compound.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
FAS vs TMF Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
FAS vs TMF Cost
Overpaying TMF vs FAS
$335
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
FAS 0.88%
$16,705
TMF 0.90%
$17,040
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | FAS | TMF | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,559 | $1,593 | $34 |
| 20 | $5,891 | $6,015 | $124 |
| 30 | $16,705 | $17,040 | $335 |
- 0.88%FAS, cheaper
- 0.90%TMF
- Middle half of 3x Leveraged Long funds
- Median 0.96%
FAS 4th cheapest of 30 funds
TMF 5th cheapest of 30 funds
FAS vs TMF Dividends
- FAS 8.87%, better
- TMF 4.68%
- FAS $14.62
- TMF $1.40
- FAS $1.00
- TMF $0.35
- FAS Sep 22, 2026
- TMF Sep 22, 2026
- FAS Sep 29, 2026
- TMF Sep 29, 2026
- FAS Quarterly
- TMF Quarterly
Distribution history
FAS vs TMF Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- FAS
- TMF
Risk facts
- Volatility
- FAS 46.3%TMF 40.2%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- FAS 1.03, betterTMF −0.07
- Worst fall
- FAS −66.9%, betterTMF −90.9%
- Market sensitivity
- FAS 2.63TMF 7.22
Popular comparisons
- 0.88% · 0.78%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.90% · 0.78%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.88% · 0.94%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.90% · 0.94%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.88% · 0.75%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.90% · 0.75%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.