MVV vs. FUTG
MVV (ProShares Ultra Midcap 400) and FUTG (Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. MVV is passively managed, while FUTG is actively managed. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MVV charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FUTG.
Performance
MVV vs. FUTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MVV achieves a 26.91% return, which is significantly higher than FUTG's -75.86% return.
MVV
- 1D
- 0.79%
- 1M
- 5.49%
- YTD
- 26.91%
- 6M
- 25.58%
- 1Y
- 46.84%
- 3Y*
- 23.31%
- 5Y*
- 6.76%
- 10Y*
- 13.56%
FUTG
- 1D
- -1.36%
- 1M
- -71.11%
- YTD
- -75.86%
- 6M
- -77.93%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MVV vs. FUTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MVV ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 | 26.91% | 2.07% |
FUTG Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF | -75.86% | -0.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between MVV and FUTG is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2025 | 0.49 |
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
MVV vs. FUTG — Risk / Return Rank
MVV
FUTG
MVV vs. FUTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) and Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF (FUTG). 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.
| MVV | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.66 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.13 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MVV | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.51 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.32 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.26 | -0.66 | +0.92 |
Drawdowns
MVV vs. FUTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MVV drawdown since its inception was -85.54%, roughly equal to the maximum FUTG drawdown of -86.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVV and FUTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MVV | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -85.54% | -86.19% | +0.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.68% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -44.80% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.53% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -69.19% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -84.51% | +84.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.55% | -40.62% | +20.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.14% | — | — |
Volatility
MVV vs. FUTG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MVV | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.23% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.64% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.13% | 135.59% | -104.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 39.63% | 135.59% | -95.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 42.35% | 135.59% | -93.24% |
MVV vs. FUTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
MVV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FUTG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
MVV vs. FUTG - Dividend Comparison
MVV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, while FUTG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FUTG Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MVV ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 | 0.67% | 0.77% | 0.39% | 0.77% | 0.93% | 0.16% | 0.29% | 0.62% | 0.62% | 0.21% | 0.43% | 0.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MVV and FUTG have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FUTG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FUTG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MVV.
MVV has the higher dividend yield at 0.67%, compared with 0.00% for FUTG.
They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MVV and 0.75% for FUTG.
Find the right allocation for MVV and FUTG
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