ESMV vs. UCO
ESMV (iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - ESMV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Extended ESG Reduced Carbon Target Index - Benchmark TR Gross, 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, ESMV returned 11.49%/yr vs 24.38%/yr for UCO. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ESMV charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.
Performance
ESMV vs. UCO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ESMV achieves a 5.72% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 139.34% return.
ESMV
- 1D
- 0.42%
- 1M
- 3.71%
- YTD
- 5.72%
- 6M
- 5.91%
- 1Y
- 7.59%
- 3Y*
- 11.49%
- 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%
ESMV vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESMV iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF | 5.72% | 5.34% | 13.06% | 12.20% | -11.08% | 3.20% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 139.34% | -29.75% | 5.36% | -13.89% | 39.71% | -4.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between ESMV and UCO is -0.21, 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 | -0.21 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2021 | 0.03 |
The correlation between ESMV and UCO shifts across timeframes, from -0.21 (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
ESMV vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank
ESMV
UCO
ESMV vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF (ESMV) 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.
| ESMV | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.14 | 1.31 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.09 | 3.34 | -2.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.34 | 6.32 | -2.99 |
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
| ESMV | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.76 | 2.03 | -1.27 |
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 | 0.44 | -0.34 | +0.79 |
Drawdowns
ESMV vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ESMV drawdown since its inception was -19.77%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESMV and UCO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ESMV | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.77% | -99.95% | +80.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.01% | -34.77% | +27.76% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.16% | -50.38% | +38.22% |
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 | -0.37% | -99.26% | +98.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.32% | -85.49% | +80.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.28% | 18.34% | -16.06% |
Volatility
ESMV vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF (ESMV) is 2.26%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 20.99%. This indicates that ESMV 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
| ESMV | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.26% | 20.99% | -18.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.27% | 46.57% | -40.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.07% | 57.26% | -47.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.24% | 59.81% | -46.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.24% | 71.35% | -58.11% |
ESMV vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ESMV has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
ESMV vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison
ESMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.58%, while UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESMV iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF | 1.58% | 1.56% | 1.71% | 1.75% | 1.66% | 0.24% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ESMV and UCO have a correlation of -0.21, 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 ESMV (2.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ESMV dropped -19.77% vs UCO's -99.95%.
On 3-year performance, UCO leads with 24.38% vs 11.49% for ESMV. On fees, ESMV is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, ESMV has been the lower-risk option at 2.26%. 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 11.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ESMV is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.
ESMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.58%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.
ESMV is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while UCO is Leveraged Commodities. ESMV tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Extended ESG Reduced Carbon Target Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while UCO tracks Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: iShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ESMV and 0.95% for UCO.
UCO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 0.76), 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 ESMV 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