EKG vs. UCO
EKG (First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - EKG is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Lux Health Tech 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 3 years, EKG returned 0.16%/yr vs 24.38%/yr for UCO. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EKG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.
Performance
EKG vs. UCO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EKG achieves a -7.15% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 139.34% return.
EKG
- 1D
- 3.29%
- 1M
- 6.48%
- YTD
- -7.15%
- 6M
- -10.81%
- 1Y
- 1.80%
- 3Y*
- 0.16%
- 5Y*
- —
- 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%
EKG vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EKG First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF | -7.15% | 11.89% | 6.53% | -0.11% | -19.59% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 139.34% | -29.75% | 5.36% | -13.89% | -31.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between EKG and UCO is -0.27, 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 | -0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2022 | 0.03 |
The correlation between EKG and UCO shifts across timeframes, from -0.27 (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
EKG vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank
EKG
UCO
EKG vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF (EKG) 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.
| EKG | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.95 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.31 | -0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.08 | 3.34 | -3.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.18 | 6.32 | -6.14 |
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
| EKG | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.08 | 2.03 | -1.95 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.36 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.17 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.10 | -0.34 | +0.24 |
Drawdowns
EKG vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EKG drawdown since its inception was -43.82%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EKG and UCO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EKG | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.82% | -99.95% | +56.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.09% | -34.77% | +12.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.49% | -50.38% | +15.89% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -67.24% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -98.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.18% | -99.26% | +81.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.66% | -85.49% | +62.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.77% | 18.34% | -8.57% |
Volatility
EKG vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF (EKG) is 7.72%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 20.99%. This indicates that EKG 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
| EKG | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.72% | 20.99% | -13.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.76% | 46.57% | -29.81% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.79% | 57.26% | -35.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.11% | 59.81% | -32.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.11% | 71.35% | -44.24% |
EKG vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison
EKG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
EKG vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison
Neither EKG nor UCO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
EKG and UCO have a correlation of -0.27, 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 EKG (7.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EKG dropped -43.82% vs UCO's -99.95%.
On 3-year performance, UCO leads with 24.38% vs 0.16% for EKG. On fees, EKG is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, EKG has been the lower-risk option at 7.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, UCO has performed better with a 24.38% return vs 0.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EKG is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.
EKG and UCO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
EKG is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while UCO is Leveraged Commodities. EKG tracks NASDAQ Lux Health Tech Index, while UCO tracks Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: First Trust and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EKG and 0.95% for UCO.
UCO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 0.08), 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 EKG 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