PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MRGR vs. EQWL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MRGR vs. EQWL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Proshares Merger ETF (MRGR) and Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MRGR achieves a 1.83% return, which is significantly lower than EQWL's 8.74% return. Over the past 10 years, MRGR has underperformed EQWL with an annualized return of 3.47%, while EQWL has yielded a comparatively higher 14.47% annualized return.


MRGR

1D
-0.33%
1M
0.80%
YTD
1.83%
6M
1.48%
1Y
11.14%
3Y*
8.65%
5Y*
3.99%
10Y*
3.47%

EQWL

1D
-0.50%
1M
4.84%
YTD
8.74%
6M
9.31%
1Y
21.89%
3Y*
19.67%
5Y*
11.79%
10Y*
14.47%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MRGR vs. EQWL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MRGR
Proshares Merger ETF
1.83%11.99%5.32%4.94%-4.81%6.58%1.99%4.31%3.42%2.08%
EQWL
Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF
8.74%17.61%19.11%19.48%-11.46%28.29%13.94%29.54%-6.30%24.41%

Correlation

The correlation between MRGR and EQWL is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

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

0.26

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

0.34

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2012

0.22

The correlation between MRGR and EQWL shifts across timeframes, from 0.22 (all time) to 0.34 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MRGR vs. EQWL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MRGR
EQWL

Healthcare

22.7%
14.0%

Industrials

17.6%
13.7%

Financial Services

12.7%
15.6%

Real Estate

12.6%
2.0%

Basic Materials

5.8%
1.0%

Energy

5.6%
3.0%

Utilities

5.4%
3.0%

Technology

5.1%
22.8%

Communication Services

4.9%
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

4.9%
8.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
8.9%

Healthcare

MRGR
22.7%
EQWL
14.0%

Industrials

MRGR
17.6%
EQWL
13.7%

Financial Services

MRGR
12.7%
EQWL
15.6%

Real Estate

MRGR
12.6%
EQWL
2.0%

Basic Materials

MRGR
5.8%
EQWL
1.0%

Energy

MRGR
5.6%
EQWL
3.0%

Utilities

MRGR
5.4%
EQWL
3.0%

Technology

MRGR
5.1%
EQWL
22.8%

Communication Services

MRGR
4.9%
EQWL
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

MRGR
4.9%
EQWL
8.5%

Consumer Defensive

MRGR
2.7%
EQWL
8.9%

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

MRGR vs. EQWL — Risk / Return Rank

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

MRGR
MRGR Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
MRGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MRGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
MRGR Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
MRGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
MRGR Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

EQWL
EQWL Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
EQWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQWL Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
EQWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQWL Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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.

MRGR vs. EQWL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Proshares Merger ETF (MRGR) and Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL). 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.


MRGREQWLDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.72

2.12

+0.60

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.63

2.99

+1.64

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.38

+0.18

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

8.65

2.83

+5.82

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

23.71

11.94

+11.77

MRGR vs. EQWL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MRGR Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is comparable to the EQWL Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MRGR and EQWL, 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


MRGREQWLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.72

2.12

+0.60

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.05

0.79

+0.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.68

0.86

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

0.59

-0.23

Drawdowns

MRGR vs. EQWL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MRGR drawdown since its inception was -13.23%, smaller than the maximum EQWL drawdown of -49.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MRGR and EQWL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MRGREQWLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.23%

-49.36%

+36.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.29%

-7.76%

+6.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.10%

-14.95%

+12.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-8.40%

-22.99%

+14.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-13.23%

-34.30%

+21.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.33%

-0.53%

+0.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.86%

-6.70%

+2.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.47%

1.84%

-1.37%

Volatility

MRGR vs. EQWL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Proshares Merger ETF (MRGR) is 1.08%, while Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL) has a volatility of 2.66%. This indicates that MRGR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EQWL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MRGREQWLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.08%

2.66%

-1.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.95%

7.66%

-4.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.11%

10.37%

-6.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.82%

14.98%

-11.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.15%

16.79%

-11.64%

MRGR vs. EQWL - Expense Ratio Comparison

MRGR has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than EQWL's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

MRGR vs. EQWL - Dividend Comparison

MRGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.97%, more than EQWL's 1.54% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EQWL
Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF
1.54%1.67%1.86%1.97%2.12%1.65%2.01%2.04%2.23%1.27%2.01%2.03%
MRGR
Proshares Merger ETF
2.97%3.12%3.21%2.11%0.61%0.59%0.00%0.78%1.39%0.36%0.74%0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions


MRGR and EQWL have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EQWL has higher volatility (2.66%) compared to MRGR (1.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MRGR dropped -13.23% vs EQWL's -49.36%.

On 10-year performance, EQWL leads with 14.47% vs 3.47% for MRGR. On fees, EQWL is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, MRGR has been the lower-risk option at 1.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, EQWL has performed better with a 14.47% return vs 3.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EQWL is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MRGR.

MRGR has the higher dividend yield at 2.97%, compared with 1.54% for EQWL.

MRGR is categorized as Hedge Fund, while EQWL is Large Cap Blend Equities. MRGR tracks S&P Merger Arbitrage Index, while EQWL tracks S&P 100 Equal Weight Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for MRGR and 0.25% for EQWL.

MRGR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 2.12), 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 MRGR and EQWL

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