BSMQ vs. UCO
BSMQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - BSMQ is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Invesco BulletShares Municipal Bond 2026 Index, while UCO is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BSMQ returned 0.31%/yr vs 21.18%/yr for UCO. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. BSMQ charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.
Performance
BSMQ vs. UCO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BSMQ achieves a 0.81% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 139.34% return.
BSMQ
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- YTD
- 0.81%
- 6M
- 1.18%
- 1Y
- 2.98%
- 3Y*
- 2.90%
- 5Y*
- 0.31%
- 10Y*
- —
UCO
- 1D
- -3.93%
- 1M
- -5.57%
- YTD
- 139.34%
- 6M
- 124.58%
- 1Y
- 115.57%
- 3Y*
- 24.38%
- 5Y*
- 21.18%
- 10Y*
- -11.98%
BSMQ vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSMQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF | 0.81% | 3.12% | 1.99% | 3.60% | -7.62% | 1.05% | 5.26% | 0.24% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 139.34% | -29.75% | 5.36% | -13.89% | 39.71% | 139.26% | -92.91% | 16.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between BSMQ and UCO is -0.19, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.19 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.06 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2019 | -0.03 |
The correlation between BSMQ and UCO shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to -0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
BSMQ vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank
BSMQ
UCO
BSMQ vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMQ) 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.
| BSMQ | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.31 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.12 | 3.34 | +5.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.88 | 6.32 | +17.56 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BSMQ | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.26 | 2.03 | +0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.12 | 0.36 | -0.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.17 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | -0.34 | +0.59 |
Drawdowns
BSMQ vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BSMQ drawdown since its inception was -13.18%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMQ and UCO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BSMQ | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.18% | -99.95% | +86.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.33% | -34.77% | +34.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -2.53% | -50.38% | +47.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.50% | -67.24% | +55.74% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -98.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.05% | -99.26% | +99.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.47% | -85.49% | +82.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.12% | 18.34% | -18.22% |
Volatility
BSMQ vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMQ) is 0.40%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 20.99%. This indicates that BSMQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UCO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BSMQ | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.40% | 20.99% | -20.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.94% | 46.57% | -45.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.33% | 57.26% | -55.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.68% | 59.81% | -57.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.79% | 71.35% | -66.56% |
BSMQ vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison
BSMQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
BSMQ vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison
BSMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.76%, while UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSMQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF | 2.76% | 2.74% | 2.75% | 2.47% | 1.60% | 1.14% | 1.57% | 0.44% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BSMQ and UCO have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UCO has higher volatility (20.99%) compared to BSMQ (0.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSMQ dropped -13.18% vs UCO's -99.95%.
On 5-year performance, UCO leads with 21.18% vs 0.31% for BSMQ. On fees, BSMQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BSMQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, UCO has performed better with a 21.18% return vs 0.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BSMQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.
BSMQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.
BSMQ is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while UCO is Leveraged Commodities. BSMQ tracks Invesco BulletShares Municipal Bond 2026 Index, while UCO tracks Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for BSMQ and 0.95% for UCO.
BSMQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 2.03), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for BSMQ and UCO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer