FXP vs. CGRO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FXP (ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50) and CGRO (CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FXP is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the FTSE China 50 Net Tax USD (TR) (-200%), while CGRO is a China Equities fund actively managed by CoreValues Alpha. FXP is passively managed, while CGRO is actively managed. Over the past year, FXP returned 12.48% vs -17.83% for CGRO. At a correlation of -0.89, they often move in opposite directions. FXP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CGRO.

Performance

FXP vs. CGRO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) and CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FXP achieves a 30.56% return, which is significantly higher than CGRO's -23.45% return.

FXP

• 1D: 4.04%
• 1M: 14.69%
• YTD: 30.56%
• 6M: 32.48%
• 1Y: 12.48%
• 3Y*: -27.51%
• 5Y*: -14.41%
• 10Y*: -22.28%

CGRO

• 1D: -2.77%
• 1M: -10.75%
• YTD: -23.45%
• 6M: -24.06%
• 1Y: -17.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FXP vs. CGRO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50	30.56%	-45.32%	-52.46%	14.69%
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	-23.45%	20.23%	14.75%	1.84%

Correlation

The correlation between FXP and CGRO is -0.87, 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	-0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2023	-0.89

The correlation between FXP and CGRO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.89 to -0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FXP vs. CGRO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FXP

FXP Risk / Return Rank: 14
FXP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
FXP Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FXP Omega Ratio Rank: 14
FXP Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FXP Martin Ratio Rank: 13

CGRO

CGRO Risk / Return Rank: 3
CGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
CGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 4

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FXP vs. CGRO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) and CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO). 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.

	FXP	CGRO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.32	-0.80	+1.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.72	-1.05	+1.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	0.88	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.51	-0.52	+1.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.89	-1.10	+1.99

FXP vs. CGRO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FXP Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is higher than the CGRO Sharpe Ratio of -0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FXP and CGRO, 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

FXP vs. CGRO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FXP drawdown since its inception was -99.94%, which is greater than CGRO's maximum drawdown of -34.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXP and CGRO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FXP	CGRO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.94%	-34.58%	-65.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.73%	-34.58%	+9.85%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.91%	-34.58%	-65.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-94.15%	-10.62%	-83.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.56%	16.18%	-1.62%

Volatility

FXP vs. CGRO - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) has a higher volatility of 12.22% compared to CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) at 6.38%. This indicates that FXP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGRO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FXP	CGRO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.22%	6.38%	+5.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.48%	16.08%	+13.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.65%	22.44%	+17.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	63.21%	28.86%	+34.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	54.78%	28.86%	+25.92%

FXP vs. CGRO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FXP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CGRO's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

FXP vs. CGRO - Dividend Comparison

FXP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.58%, less than CGRO's 3.66% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	3.66%	2.48%	2.47%	0.21%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50	3.58%	9.57%	3.55%	2.20%	0.06%	0.00%	0.06%	1.20%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FXP and CGRO in my portfolio?

FXP and CGRO have a correlation of -0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FXP or CGRO?

FXP has higher volatility (12.22%) compared to CGRO (6.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FXP dropped -99.94% vs CGRO's -34.58%.

Which ETF is better, FXP or CGRO?

On 1-year performance, FXP leads with 12.48% vs -17.83% for CGRO. On fees, CGRO is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, CGRO has been the lower-risk option at 6.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FXP or CGRO?

Over the 1-year period, FXP has performed better with a 12.48% return vs -17.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FXP or CGRO?

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

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

CGRO has the higher dividend yield at 3.66%, compared with 3.58% for FXP.

What is the main difference between FXP and CGRO?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FXP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.32 vs -0.80), 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.