SOXL vs TMF ETF Comparison
Compare SOXL and TMF across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between SOXL and TMF?
SOXL is Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X ETF, while TMF is Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF. SOXL is tied to Equity; TMF is tied to Fixed Income. SOXL is broader by holdings count, with 30 positions versus 1 for TMF. TMF is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | SOXL | TMF | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.91% | 1.01% | Fund |
| Assets under management | $18.2B | $2.2B | Fund |
| Holdings | 30 | 1 | Fund |
| Top-10 concentration | 20.7% | 39% | Fund |
| Average volume | 81,412,126 | 7,547,530 | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | Equity | Fixed Income | Fund |
| Annualized volatility | 133.5% | 27.4% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -69.4% | -32.4% | Risk |
| Beta | 7.68 | 0.52 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.75 | -0.71 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | 2.44 | -1.14 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 42/100 | 44/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 2/10 | 2/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 24/100 | 43/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 0/100 | 31/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X ETF vs Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF
TMF leads
TMF leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from SOXL.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support TMF, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X ETF
Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TMF over SOXL, 44 versus 42 as of Sep 5, 2026. TMF's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while SOXL holds the stronger quality profile. TMF also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TMF today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. TMF lead: Reversed — SOXL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TMF now leads by 2.
Compare Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X ETF and Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Compare SOXL and TMF against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Risk Resilience15%0 vs 31TMF +31
- Momentum25%24 vs 43TMF +19
- Quality30%76 vs 60SOXL +16
- Value30%45 vs 36SOXL +9
2 of 4 evidence groups favor TMF. TMF’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; SOXL keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No new signals fired.
TMF's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SOXL and TMF both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TMF (Direxion Daily 20+ Year Treasury Bull 3X ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
SOXL (Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X ETF): the counter-case, on quality, value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 93.2% against 30.6%.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
TMFTMF on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
SOXLSOXL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 points.
Momentum
TMFTMF on the Momentum factor, by 19 points.
Lower downside
TMFTMF on Risk Resilience, by 31 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | SOXL | TMF | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.91% | 1.01% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $18.2B | $2.2B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 44 | 13 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 81,412,126 | 7,547,530 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 133.5% | 27.4% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -69.4% | -32.4% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.75 | -0.71 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 7.68 | 0.52 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
SOXL and TMF share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.
TMF is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 38.96% of the fund, against 20.69% for SOXL (1 holdings vs 30). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
30 holdings are unique to SOXL and 1 to TMF. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
ETF comparison questions
Short answers to the fund-specific questions behind this comparison.
Which ETF is more diversified, SOXL or TMF?
SOXL currently has more reported holdings, with 30 positions versus 1.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
SOXL has the lower reported expense ratio in the current fund profile.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
The current dataset does not show a higher-yield winner.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
SOXL has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
TMF has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
TMF currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 44 to 42.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TMF. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 42 vs 44 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | SOXL | Value 45 vs 36 |
| Technicals | TMF | Price vs 50-day -20.7% vs -4.2%; vs 200-day -1.5% vs -14.4% |
| Risk Resilience | TMF | Risk Resilience 0 vs 31 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SOXL and TMF and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on TMF.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3TMF lead: Reversed — SOXL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TMF now leads by 2.
- Today
- TMF +2
- 42 vs 44
- 7 sessions ago
- SOXL +1
- 46 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- SOXL +4
- 47 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- TMF +3
- 46 vs 49
The lead changed hands 11 times in this window, most recently on Sep 1 when TMF moved ahead of SOXL.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (36.43%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (12.96%)
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.51%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
TMF leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +9.87%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.36%, AIQ +1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1SOXL closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to TMF's edge.
- 2SOXL's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3TMF's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Technicals
TMF has the stronger structure| Metric | SOXL | TMF |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.8 | 51.3 |
| ADX (14) | 20.1 | 16.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -20.7% | -4.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1.5% | -14.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 93.2% | 30.6% |
Risk
TMF is the more resilient| Metric | SOXL | TMF |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 7.68 | 0.52 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.75 | -0.71 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.44 | -1.14 |
| Max drawdown | -69.4% | -32.4% |
| Current drawdown | -64.5% | -30.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 133.5% | 27.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -14.4% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SOXL or TMF?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TMF is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 44 against SOXL's 42. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. SOXL is not without a case — it holds the better quality profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is SOXL or TMF the better buy right now?
TMF carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TMF over SOXL?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. TMF leads Risk Resilience by 31 points; TMF leads Momentum by 19 points; SOXL leads Quality by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, SOXL or TMF?
SOXL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SOXL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, SOXL or TMF?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, SOXL or TMF?
TMF on the Momentum factor, by 19 points. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, SOXL or TMF?
TMF is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TMF on Risk Resilience, by 31 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is SOXL more profitable than TMF?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is TMF's lead over SOXL getting stronger or weaker?
TMF lead: Reversed — SOXL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TMF now leads by 2. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 11 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-01, when TMF moved ahead of SOXL.
What would change the SOXL vs TMF verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SOXL closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to TMF's edge; SOXL's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; TMF's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about SOXL and TMF?
SOXL: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TMF: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on SOXL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TMF it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SOXL and TMF with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.