PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FXP vs. ISVBF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FXP vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FXP achieves a 18.47% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -8.71% return.


FXP

1D
-3.86%
1M
3.05%
6M
30.45%
YTD
18.47%
1Y
11.32%
3Y*
-27.15%
5Y*
-17.15%
10Y*
-21.61%

ISVBF

1D
1.84%
1M
-1.17%
6M
-13.00%
YTD
-8.71%
1Y
-1.01%
3Y*
8.64%
5Y*
-5.34%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FXP vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FXP
ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50
18.47%-45.32%-52.46%12.74%-11.73%28.89%
ISVBF
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF
-8.71%30.64%18.96%-9.28%-23.01%-22.12%

Correlation

The correlation between FXP and ISVBF is -0.67, 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

-0.67

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.51

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021

-0.35

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between FXP and ISVBF has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.35 to -0.67, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

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. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FXP
FXP Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
FXP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FXP Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
FXP Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
FXP Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
FXP Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank

ISVBF
ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
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. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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.


FXPISVBFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.02

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.52

-0.04

+0.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.95

-0.10

+1.04

FXP vs. ISVBF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FXP Sharpe Ratio is 0.28, which is higher than the ISVBF Sharpe Ratio of -0.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FXP and ISVBF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FXP vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FXP drawdown since its inception was -99.94%, which is greater than ISVBF's maximum drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXP and ISVBF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FXPISVBFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-99.94%

-53.78%

-46.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.99%

-24.14%

+2.15%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-82.34%

-24.14%

-58.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-87.85%

-52.51%

-35.34%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-93.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-99.91%

-26.01%

-73.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-94.16%

-32.64%

-61.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.99%

10.49%

+1.50%

Volatility

FXP vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) has a higher volatility of 13.69% compared to iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) at 7.72%. This indicates that FXP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FXPISVBFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.69%

7.72%

+5.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

29.20%

27.02%

+2.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

40.34%

31.48%

+8.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

63.18%

30.46%

+32.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

54.77%

30.13%

+24.64%

FXP vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FXP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

FXP vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison

FXP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.04%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
FXP
ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50
3.04%9.57%3.55%2.20%0.06%0.00%0.06%1.20%0.16%
ISVBF
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FXP and ISVBF have a correlation of -0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FXP has higher volatility (13.69%) compared to ISVBF (7.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FXP dropped -99.94% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.

On 5-year performance, ISVBF leads with -5.34% vs -17.15% for FXP. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF 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 5-year period, ISVBF has performed better with a -5.34% return vs -17.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FXP.

FXP has the higher dividend yield at 3.04%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.

FXP tracks FTSE China 50 Net Tax USD (TR) (-200%), while ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FXP and 0.40% for ISVBF.

FXP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.28 vs -0.03), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FXP and ISVBF

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