CGRO vs. FXP

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

CGRO (CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF) and FXP (ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50) are both exchange-traded funds - CGRO is a China Equities fund actively managed by CoreValues Alpha, while FXP is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the FTSE China 50 Net Tax USD (TR) (-200%). CGRO is actively managed, while FXP is passively managed. Over the past year, CGRO returned -22.42% vs 28.98% for FXP. At a correlation of -0.89, they often move in opposite directions. CGRO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FXP.

Performance

CGRO vs. FXP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGRO achieves a -25.74% return, which is significantly lower than FXP's 41.49% return.

CGRO

• 1D: -2.38%
• 1M: -14.29%
• YTD: -25.74%
• 6M: -26.27%
• 1Y: -22.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FXP

• 1D: 5.21%
• 1M: 25.84%
• YTD: 41.49%
• 6M: 43.45%
• 1Y: 28.98%
• 3Y*: -25.26%
• 5Y*: -12.36%
• 10Y*: -21.73%

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

CGRO vs. FXP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	-25.74%	20.23%	14.75%	1.84%
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50	41.49%	-45.32%	-52.46%	14.69%

Correlation

The correlation between CGRO and FXP is -0.87, 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	-0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2023	-0.89

The correlation between CGRO and FXP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.89 to -0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CGRO vs. FXP — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGRO

CGRO Risk / Return Rank: 3
CGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
CGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
CGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 2
CGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
CGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 3

FXP

FXP Risk / Return Rank: 23
FXP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
FXP Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FXP Omega Ratio Rank: 23
FXP Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
FXP Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

CGRO vs. FXP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP). 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.

	CGRO	FXP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.01	0.73	-1.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.39	1.25	-2.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.15	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.62	1.18	-1.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.36	2.07	-3.43

CGRO vs. FXP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGRO Sharpe Ratio is -1.01, which is lower than the FXP Sharpe Ratio of 0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGRO and FXP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CGRO vs. FXP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGRO drawdown since its inception was -36.53%, smaller than the maximum FXP drawdown of -99.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGRO and FXP.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGRO	FXP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.53%	-99.94%	+63.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-36.53%	-24.73%	-11.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-82.34%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-87.85%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-94.44%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.53%	-99.90%	+63.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.69%	-94.15%	+83.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.49%	14.07%	+2.42%

Volatility

CGRO vs. FXP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) is 6.33%, while ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) has a volatility of 12.89%. This indicates that CGRO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FXP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGRO	FXP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.33%	12.89%	-6.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.12%	29.92%	-13.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.30%	39.64%	-17.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.86%	63.24%	-34.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.86%	54.79%	-25.93%

CGRO vs. FXP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGRO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than FXP's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGRO vs. FXP - Dividend Comparison

CGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.77%, more than FXP's 2.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	3.77%	2.48%	2.47%	0.21%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50	2.54%	9.57%	3.55%	2.20%	0.06%	0.00%	0.06%	1.20%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGRO and FXP in my portfolio?

CGRO and FXP have a correlation of -0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGRO or FXP?

FXP has higher volatility (12.89%) compared to CGRO (6.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGRO dropped -36.53% vs FXP's -99.94%.

Which ETF is better, CGRO or FXP?

On 1-year performance, FXP leads with 28.98% vs -22.42% for CGRO. On fees, CGRO is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, CGRO has been the lower-risk option at 6.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGRO or FXP?

Over the 1-year period, FXP has performed better with a 28.98% return vs -22.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGRO or FXP?

CGRO is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FXP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGRO or FXP?

CGRO has the higher dividend yield at 3.77%, compared with 2.54% for FXP.

What is the main difference between CGRO and FXP?

CGRO is categorized as China Equities, while FXP is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: CoreValues Alpha and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CGRO and 0.95% for FXP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FXP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.73 vs -1.01), 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.