BILT vs. UCO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BILT (iShares Infrastructure Active ETF) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - BILT is a Utilities Equities fund actively managed by iShares, while UCO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (200%). BILT is actively managed, while UCO is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. BILT charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.

Performance

BILT vs. UCO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BILT achieves a 13.47% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 81.88% return.

BILT

• 1D: 0.43%
• 1M: -0.78%
• YTD: 13.47%
• 6M: 13.63%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UCO

• 1D: -1.26%
• 1M: -25.61%
• YTD: 81.88%
• 6M: 76.32%
• 1Y: 42.04%
• 3Y*: 15.38%
• 5Y*: 12.42%
• 10Y*: 19.46%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BILT vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF	13.47%	4.16%
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil	81.88%	-27.69%

Correlation

The correlation between BILT and UCO is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2025	-0.12

Return for Risk

BILT vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BILT

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

UCO

UCO Risk / Return Rank: 24
UCO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
UCO Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
UCO Omega Ratio Rank: 24
UCO Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
UCO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BILT vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BILT	UCO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.75	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.30	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.16	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.30	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	2.61	—

Drawdowns

BILT vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BILT drawdown since its inception was -5.38%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BILT and UCO.

Drawdown Indicators

	BILT	UCO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.38%	-99.86%	+94.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-32.37%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-50.38%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-67.24%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-96.50%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	-85.89%	+84.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.44%	-82.11%	+80.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	16.23%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BILT	UCO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	16.11%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	48.06%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.28%	57.57%	-47.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.28%	60.09%	-49.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.28%	317.77%	-307.49%

BILT vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison

BILT has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

BILT vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison

BILT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.74%, while UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF	5.74%	0.99%
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BILT and UCO in my portfolio?

BILT and UCO have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BILT or UCO?

On fees, BILT is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BILT or UCO?

BILT is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BILT or UCO?

BILT has the higher dividend yield at 5.74%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.

What is the main difference between BILT and UCO?

BILT is categorized as Utilities Equities, while UCO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: iShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BILT and 0.95% for UCO.