FXP vs. ABNG
FXP (ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50) and ABNG (Leverage Shares 2x Long ABNB Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. FXP is passively managed, while ABNG is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.25, they often move in opposite directions. FXP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for ABNG.
Performance
FXP vs. ABNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FXP achieves a 13.64% return, which is significantly higher than ABNG's -12.31% return.
FXP
- 1D
- 4.65%
- 1M
- 5.53%
- YTD
- 13.64%
- 6M
- 16.82%
- 1Y
- -6.43%
- 3Y*
- -30.22%
- 5Y*
- -16.52%
- 10Y*
- -23.04%
ABNG
- 1D
- -0.92%
- 1M
- -8.78%
- YTD
- -12.31%
- 6M
- 10.42%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FXP vs. ABNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 | 13.64% | 5.54% |
ABNG Leverage Shares 2x Long ABNB Daily ETF | -12.31% | 30.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between FXP and ABNG is -0.25, 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 18, 2025 | -0.25 |
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
FXP vs. ABNG — Risk / Return Rank
FXP
ABNG
FXP vs. ABNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) and Leverage Shares 2x Long ABNB Daily ETF (ABNG). 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.
| FXP | ABNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.24 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.40 | — | — |
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
| FXP | ABNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.16 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.26 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.42 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.44 | 0.46 | -0.90 |
Drawdowns
FXP vs. ABNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FXP drawdown since its inception was -99.94%, which is greater than ABNG's maximum drawdown of -33.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXP and ABNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FXP | ABNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.94% | -33.03% | -66.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.21% | — | — |
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 | -94.71% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.92% | -17.35% | -82.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -94.15% | -11.73% | -82.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.66% | — | — |
Volatility
FXP vs. ABNG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FXP | ABNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.06% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.87% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.29% | 63.13% | -23.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 63.12% | 63.13% | -0.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.91% | 63.13% | -8.22% |
FXP vs. ABNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FXP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than ABNG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
FXP vs. ABNG - Dividend Comparison
FXP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, while ABNG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ABNG Leverage Shares 2x Long ABNB Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 | 4.12% | 9.57% | 3.55% | 2.20% | 0.06% | 0.00% | 0.06% | 1.20% | 0.16% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FXP and ABNG have a correlation of -0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ABNG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ABNG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FXP.
FXP has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 0.00% for ABNG.
They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FXP and 0.75% for ABNG.
Find the right allocation for FXP and ABNG
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