MVV vs. NOBL
MVV (ProShares Ultra Midcap 400) and NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MVV is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index (200%), while NOBL is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MVV returned 13.68%/yr vs 9.53%/yr for NOBL. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MVV charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for NOBL.
Performance
MVV vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MVV achieves a 26.09% return, which is significantly higher than NOBL's 3.68% return. Over the past 10 years, MVV has outperformed NOBL with an annualized return of 13.68%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively lower 9.53% annualized return.
MVV
- 1D
- 1.75%
- 1M
- 6.05%
- YTD
- 26.09%
- 6M
- 27.71%
- 1Y
- 48.71%
- 3Y*
- 22.19%
- 5Y*
- 6.86%
- 10Y*
- 13.68%
NOBL
- 1D
- 0.37%
- 1M
- -0.27%
- YTD
- 3.68%
- 6M
- 4.28%
- 1Y
- 9.53%
- 3Y*
- 8.08%
- 5Y*
- 5.15%
- 10Y*
- 9.53%
MVV vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MVV ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 | 26.09% | 3.48% | 17.75% | 22.51% | -31.96% | 48.57% | 6.20% | 49.50% | -25.44% | 30.81% |
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 3.68% | 6.84% | 6.72% | 8.09% | -6.52% | 25.46% | 8.35% | 27.39% | -3.26% | 21.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between MVV and NOBL is 0.68, 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 | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2013 | 0.83 |
The correlation between MVV and NOBL shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (1 year) to 0.83 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
MVV vs. NOBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MVV
NOBL
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Communication Services
-
Industrials
MVV
NOBL
Technology
MVV
NOBL
Financial Services
MVV
NOBL
Consumer Cyclical
MVV
NOBL
Healthcare
MVV
NOBL
Real Estate
MVV
NOBL
Energy
MVV
NOBL
Basic Materials
MVV
NOBL
Consumer Defensive
MVV
NOBL
Utilities
MVV
NOBL
Communication Services
MVV
NOBL
-
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. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank
MVV
NOBL
MVV vs. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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 | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.57 | 0.84 | +0.72 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.22 | 1.31 | +0.91 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.15 | +0.12 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.73 | 1.03 | +1.70 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.38 | 2.69 | +6.69 |
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 | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.57 | 0.84 | +0.72 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 | 0.36 | -0.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.32 | 0.58 | -0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.26 | 0.64 | -0.39 |
Drawdowns
MVV vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MVV drawdown since its inception was -85.54%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVV and NOBL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MVV | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -85.54% | -35.43% | -50.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.68% | -9.11% | -8.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -44.80% | -15.36% | -29.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.53% | -17.92% | -27.61% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -69.19% | -35.43% | -33.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -5.83% | +5.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.55% | -3.48% | -17.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.14% | 3.48% | +1.66% |
Volatility
MVV vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) has a higher volatility of 8.69% compared to ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) at 2.78%. This indicates that MVV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MVV | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.69% | 2.78% | +5.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.69% | 8.01% | +14.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.22% | 11.33% | +19.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 39.64% | 14.38% | +25.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 42.37% | 16.61% | +25.76% |
MVV vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison
MVV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
MVV vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison
MVV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, less than NOBL's 2.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 2.12% | 2.14% | 2.05% | 2.09% | 1.94% | 1.89% | 2.14% | 1.89% | 2.37% | 1.74% | 2.13% | 2.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MVV and NOBL have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MVV has higher volatility (8.69%) compared to NOBL (2.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MVV dropped -85.54% vs NOBL's -35.43%.
On 10-year performance, MVV leads with 13.68% vs 9.53% for NOBL. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 2.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, MVV has performed better with a 13.68% return vs 9.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MVV.
NOBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 0.67% for MVV.
MVV is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while NOBL is S&P 500. MVV tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (200%), while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MVV and 0.35% for NOBL.
MVV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 0.84), 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 MVV and NOBL
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