CGRO vs. SBIT

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

CGRO (CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF) and SBIT (Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGRO is a China Equities fund actively managed by CoreValues, while SBIT is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Bloomberg Bitcoin Index (-200%). CGRO is actively managed, while SBIT is passively managed. Over the past year, CGRO returned -12.32% vs 98.77% for SBIT. Their -0.30 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. CGRO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for SBIT.

Performance

CGRO vs. SBIT - 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 Bitcoin ETF (SBIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGRO achieves a -14.78% return, which is significantly lower than SBIT's 39.44% return.

CGRO

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 10.60%
• 6M: -14.23%
• YTD: -14.78%
• 1Y: -12.32%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.68%

SBIT

• 1D: 5.60%
• 1M: -6.04%
• 6M: 32.41%
• YTD: 39.44%
• 1Y: 98.77%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -42.65%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	$6.34K	$10.29K	$35.39K
SBIT Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF	$29.57M	$32.71M	$46.48M

CGRO vs. SBIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	-14.78%	20.23%	16.10%
SBIT Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF	39.44%	-25.11%	-73.74%

Correlation

The correlation between CGRO and SBIT is -0.40, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024	-0.30

Return for Risk

CGRO vs. SBIT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CGRO

CGRO Risk / Return Rank: 5
CGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
CGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
CGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 5
CGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
CGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 6

SBIT

SBIT Risk / Return Rank: 55
SBIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
SBIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
SBIT Omega Ratio Rank: 52
SBIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
SBIT Martin Ratio Rank: 46

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CGRO vs. SBIT - 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 Bitcoin ETF (SBIT). 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	SBIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.59	1.27	-1.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.71	1.95	-2.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.23	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.37	2.35	-2.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.70	5.19	-5.89

CGRO vs. SBIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGRO Sharpe Ratio is -0.59, which is lower than the SBIT Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGRO and SBIT, 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. SBIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGRO drawdown since its inception was -36.53%, smaller than the maximum SBIT drawdown of -91.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGRO and SBIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGRO	SBIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.53%	-91.35%	+54.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-36.53%	-47.94%	+11.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.16%	-77.87%	+50.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.43%	-69.07%	+57.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	19.21%	21.67%	-2.46%

Volatility

CGRO vs. SBIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) is 6.84%, while Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF (SBIT) has a volatility of 18.09%. This indicates that CGRO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SBIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGRO	SBIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.84%	18.09%	-11.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.65%	67.10%	-50.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.07%	88.65%	-65.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.70%	96.10%	-67.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.70%	96.10%	-67.40%

CGRO vs. SBIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

CGRO vs. SBIT - Dividend Comparison

CGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.29%, less than SBIT's 4.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	3.29%	2.48%	2.47%	0.21%
SBIT Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF	4.03%	0.52%	1.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGRO and SBIT in my portfolio?

CGRO and SBIT have a correlation of -0.40, 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 SBIT?

SBIT has higher volatility (18.09%) compared to CGRO (6.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGRO dropped -36.53% vs SBIT's -91.35%.

Which ETF is better, CGRO or SBIT?

On 1-year performance, SBIT leads with 98.77% vs -12.32% for CGRO. On fees, CGRO is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, CGRO has been the lower-risk option at 6.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGRO or SBIT?

Over the 1-year period, SBIT has performed better with a 98.77% return vs -12.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGRO or SBIT?

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

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

SBIT has the higher dividend yield at 4.03%, compared with 3.29% for CGRO.

What is the main difference between CGRO and SBIT?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SBIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.27 vs -0.59), 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.