ISVBF vs. XPP
ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) are both China Equities funds - ISVBF tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index while XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ISVBF returned -6.00%/yr vs -20.34%/yr for XPP. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for XPP.
Performance
ISVBF vs. XPP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISVBF achieves a -11.89% return, which is significantly higher than XPP's -26.96% return.
ISVBF
- 1D
- -1.30%
- 1M
- -3.57%
- 6M
- -17.04%
- YTD
- -11.89%
- 1Y
- -2.60%
- 3Y*
- 7.37%
- 5Y*
- -6.00%
- 10Y*
- —
XPP
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- -9.77%
- 6M
- -34.75%
- YTD
- -26.96%
- 1Y
- -21.29%
- 3Y*
- 1.14%
- 5Y*
- -20.34%
- 10Y*
- -7.40%
ISVBF vs. XPP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -11.89% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -26.96% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -36.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISVBF and XPP is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.50 |
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, ISVBF and XPP have become more correlated (0.67) than their long-term average of 0.34, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
ISVBF vs. XPP — Risk / Return Rank
ISVBF
XPP
ISVBF vs. XPP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) and ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP). 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.
| ISVBF | XPP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 0.94 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.11 | -0.48 | +0.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.25 | -1.06 | +0.81 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ISVBF vs. XPP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, smaller than the maximum XPP drawdown of -89.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and XPP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISVBF | XPP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.78% | -89.90% | +36.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.14% | -44.78% | +20.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.14% | -52.95% | +28.81% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -52.51% | -83.51% | +31.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -89.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.59% | -80.67% | +52.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.65% | -48.01% | +15.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.37% | 20.17% | -9.80% |
Volatility
ISVBF vs. XPP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) is 7.77%, while ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a volatility of 12.70%. This indicates that ISVBF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XPP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISVBF | XPP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.77% | 12.70% | -4.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 27.10% | 29.45% | -2.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.44% | 39.94% | -8.50% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.44% | 62.76% | -32.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.13% | 54.77% | -24.64% |
ISVBF vs. XPP - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than XPP's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISVBF vs. XPP - Dividend Comparison
ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | 2.86% | 2.32% | 2.96% | 2.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 3.81% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ISVBF and XPP 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.
XPP has higher volatility (12.70%) compared to ISVBF (7.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs XPP's -89.90%.
On 5-year performance, ISVBF leads with -6.00% vs -20.34% for XPP. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 7.77%. 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 -6.00% return vs -20.34%. 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 XPP.
XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: iShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.95% for XPP.
ISVBF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.08 vs -0.54), 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.
Find the right allocation for ISVBF and XPP
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