PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBIL vs. UCO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBIL vs. UCO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Oct 2035 Term TIPS ETF (IBIL) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBIL achieves a 1.65% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 139.34% return.


IBIL

1D
0.06%
1M
-0.17%
YTD
1.65%
6M
1.23%
1Y
5.94%
3Y*
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%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBIL vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between IBIL and UCO is -0.19, 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

-0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025

-0.12

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

IBIL vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBIL
IBIL Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
IBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank

UCO
UCO Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
UCO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UCO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
UCO Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
UCO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
UCO Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
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.

IBIL vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Oct 2035 Term TIPS ETF (IBIL) 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.


IBILUCODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.31

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.16

3.34

-1.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.18

6.32

-1.14

IBIL vs. UCO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBIL Sharpe Ratio is 1.07, which is lower than the UCO Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBIL and UCO, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IBILUCODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.07

2.03

-0.96

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

0.66

-0.34

+1.01

Drawdowns

IBIL vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBIL drawdown since its inception was -5.28%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBIL and UCO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBILUCODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-5.28%

-99.95%

+94.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.76%

-34.77%

+32.01%

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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.60%

-99.26%

+98.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.48%

-85.49%

+84.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.15%

18.34%

-17.19%

Volatility

IBIL vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Oct 2035 Term TIPS ETF (IBIL) is 1.25%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 20.99%. This indicates that IBIL 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


IBILUCODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.25%

20.99%

-19.74%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.08%

46.57%

-43.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.58%

57.26%

-51.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.19%

59.81%

-51.62%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.19%

71.35%

-63.16%

IBIL vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBIL has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

IBIL vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison

IBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.47%, while UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


IBIL and UCO have a correlation of -0.19, 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 IBIL (1.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBIL dropped -5.28% vs UCO's -99.95%.

On 1-year performance, UCO leads with 115.57% vs 5.94% for IBIL. On fees, IBIL is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIL has been the lower-risk option at 1.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, UCO has performed better with a 115.57% return vs 5.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBIL is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.

IBIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.47%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.

IBIL is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while UCO is Leveraged Commodities. IBIL tracks ICE 2035 Maturity US Treasury TIPS Index, while UCO tracks Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: iShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBIL and 0.95% for UCO.

UCO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.07), 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 IBIL 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