FAS ranks 2nd and UMDD 10th of 30 funds in the 3x Leveraged Long Category.
FAS vs UMDD
FAS −0.07pt a year
0.88%0.95%
FAS 68.7×the volume
408K5.94K
FAS +11.4pt
+23.2%+11.8%
FAS vs UMDD Performance
+51.0%−9.7%
- FAS 0.88%, better
- UMDD 0.95%
- FAS $2.06B
- UMDD $28M
- FAS +27.3%
- UMDD +36.6%, better
- FAS 7.80%, better
- UMDD 0.58%
- FAS 88
- UMDD 401
- FAS 408K sh, better
- UMDD 5.94K sh
- FAS $164.44
- UMDD $32.62
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | FAS | UMDD |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A92Higher | B62 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | B69Higher | B67 |
| Tradability | A75Higher | D39 |
| Holdings | ||
| Durability | B66Higher | C49 |
Rank among 3x Leveraged Long funds
Same Category. FAS and UMDD are both graded against the same 30 3x Leveraged Long funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
FASA
UMDDB
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.
UMDD The 3x shelf crowds into big tech and chips. UMDD points at the middle of the market: three times the daily move of the S&P MidCap 400, for 0.95% net of a waiver through September 30, 2027.
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.
UMDD The fund seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, corresponding to three times the daily performance of the S&P MidCap 400 Index.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
FAS vs UMDD 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 UMDD Cost
Overpaying UMDD vs FAS
$1,164
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
FAS 0.88%
$16,705
UMDD 0.95%
$17,869
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | FAS | UMDD | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,559 | $1,678 | $119 |
| 20 | $5,891 | $6,322 | $431 |
| 30 | $16,705 | $17,869 | $1,164 |
- 0.88%FAS, cheaper
- 0.95%UMDD
- Middle half of 3x Leveraged Long funds
- Median 0.96%
FAS 4th cheapest of 30 funds
UMDD 9th cheapest of 30 funds
FAS vs UMDD Dividends
- FAS 7.80%, better
- UMDD 0.58%
- FAS $14.62
- UMDD $0.19
- FAS $1.00
- UMDD $0.03
- FAS Sep 22, 2026
- UMDD Sep 23, 2026
- FAS Sep 29, 2026
- UMDD Sep 29, 2026
- FAS Quarterly
- UMDD Quarterly
Distribution history
FAS vs UMDD Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- FAS
- UMDD
Risk facts
- Volatility
- FAS 46.3%, betterUMDD 46.7%
- Return per unit of risk
- FAS 1.03, betterUMDD 0.71
- Worst fall
- FAS −66.9%UMDD −64.6%, better
- Market sensitivity
- FAS 2.63UMDD 3.07
Popular comparisons
- 0.88% · 0.78%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 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.
- 0.95% · 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.
- 0.95% · 0.75%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.