FTMA vs. UCO
FTMA (Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - FTMA is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Actively Managed, while UCO is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.42, they often move in opposite directions. FTMA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.
Performance
FTMA vs. UCO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FTMA achieves a 2.06% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 149.12% return.
FTMA
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.80%
- YTD
- 2.06%
- 6M
- 2.90%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
UCO
- 1D
- 2.71%
- 1M
- -4.64%
- YTD
- 149.12%
- 6M
- 137.09%
- 1Y
- 120.48%
- 3Y*
- 25.90%
- 5Y*
- 22.16%
- 10Y*
- -11.31%
FTMA vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FTMA Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF | 2.06% | 0.43% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 149.12% | -9.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between FTMA and UCO is -0.42, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2025 | -0.42 |
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
FTMA vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank
FTMA
UCO
FTMA vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF (FTMA) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FTMA | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.12 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.37 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.16 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.29 | -0.34 | +1.63 |
Drawdowns
FTMA vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FTMA drawdown since its inception was -2.27%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTMA and UCO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FTMA | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.27% | -99.95% | +97.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -34.77% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -50.38% | — |
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 | -0.06% | -99.23% | +99.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.51% | -85.49% | +84.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 18.33% | — |
Volatility
FTMA vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FTMA | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 20.83% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 46.44% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.52% | 57.11% | -53.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.52% | 59.78% | -56.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.52% | 71.36% | -67.84% |
FTMA vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FTMA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
FTMA vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison
FTMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, while UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
FTMA Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF | 1.96% | 0.54% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FTMA and UCO have a correlation of -0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FTMA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FTMA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.
FTMA has the higher dividend yield at 1.96%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.
FTMA is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while UCO is Leveraged Commodities. FTMA tracks Actively Managed, while UCO tracks Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FTMA and 0.95% for UCO.
Find the right allocation for FTMA 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