FAS ranks 3rd and UTSL 15th of 30 funds in the 3x Leveraged Long Category.
FAS vs UTSL
FAS −0.09pt a year
0.88%0.97%
FAS 2.2×the volume
413K191K
Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
+5.6%+5.6%
FAS vs UTSL Performance
+31.4%+31.3%
- FAS 0.88%, better
- UTSL 0.97%
- FAS $2.17B
- UTSL $69M
- FAS +12.3%, better
- UTSL −15.6%
- FAS 8.87%, better
- UTSL 2.41%
- FAS 87
- UTSL 39
- FAS 413K sh, better
- UTSL 191K sh
- FAS $168.18
- UTSL $37.49
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | FAS | UTSL |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A92Higher | D38 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | B69Higher | C53 |
| Tradability | A73Higher | B60 |
| Holdings | ||
| Durability | B66Higher | D37 |
Rank among 3x Leveraged Long funds
Same Category. FAS and UTSL are both graded against the same 30 3x Leveraged Long funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
FASA
UTSLC
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.
UTSL Triple-leveraged exposure pointed at the market's sleepiest sector: UTSL seeks 300% of the Utilities Select Sector Index's daily move, reset every day. 0.97% net of a waiver through September 1, 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.
UTSL The fund seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, equal to 300% of the performance of the Utilities Select Sector Index.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
FAS vs UTSL 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 UTSL Cost
Overpaying UTSL vs FAS
$1,493
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
FAS 0.88%
$16,705
UTSL 0.97%
$18,198
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | FAS | UTSL | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,559 | $1,712 | $153 |
| 20 | $5,891 | $6,443 | $552 |
| 30 | $16,705 | $18,198 | $1,493 |
- 0.88%FAS, cheaper
- 0.97%UTSL
- Middle half of 3x Leveraged Long funds
- Median 0.96%
FAS 4th cheapest of 30 funds
UTSL 16th cheapest of 30 funds
FAS vs UTSL Dividends
- FAS 8.87%, better
- UTSL 2.41%
- FAS $14.62
- UTSL $0.92
- FAS $1.00
- UTSL $0.40
- FAS Sep 22, 2026
- UTSL Sep 22, 2026
- FAS Sep 29, 2026
- UTSL Sep 29, 2026
- FAS Quarterly
- UTSL Quarterly
Distribution history
FAS vs UTSL Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- FAS
- UTSL
Risk facts
- Volatility
- FAS 46.3%, betterUTSL 48.3%
- Return per unit of risk
- FAS 1.03, betterUTSL 0.71
- Worst fall
- FAS −66.9%, betterUTSL −68.0%
- Market sensitivity
- FAS 2.63UTSL 1.20
Popular comparisons
- 0.88% · 0.78%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.97% · 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.
- 0.97% · 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.
- 0.97% · 0.75%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.