PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MZZ vs. XMMO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MZZ vs. XMMO

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

MZZ (ProShares UltraShort MidCap400) and XMMO (Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MZZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index (-200%), while XMMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MZZ returned -25.27%/yr vs 19.66%/yr for XMMO. At a correlation of -0.87, they often move in opposite directions. MZZ charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XMMO.

Performance

MZZ vs. XMMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort MidCap400 (MZZ) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MZZ achieves a -22.57% return, which is significantly lower than XMMO's 22.96% return. Over the past 10 years, MZZ has underperformed XMMO with an annualized return of -25.27%, while XMMO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.66% annualized return.

MZZ

1D
-1.64%
1M
-5.89%
YTD
-22.57%
6M
-23.66%
1Y
-35.66%
3Y*
-23.59%
5Y*
-16.74%
10Y*
-25.27%

XMMO

1D
2.16%
1M
6.07%
YTD
22.96%
6M
24.84%
1Y
37.37%
3Y*
31.83%
5Y*
16.81%
10Y*
19.66%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MZZ vs. XMMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MZZ
ProShares UltraShort MidCap400		-22.57%-14.68%-17.75%-23.67%13.02%-42.14%-53.08%-38.03%22.83%-27.72%
XMMO
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF		22.96%13.04%38.03%20.39%-16.02%16.69%29.17%36.78%6.12%37.18%

Correlation

The correlation between MZZ and XMMO is -0.85, 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

-0.85

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

-0.90

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

-0.91

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

-0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2006

-0.87

The correlation between MZZ and XMMO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.91 to -0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

ProShares UltraShort MidCap400

Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF

Often compared with MZZ:
MZZ vs. ARMGMZZ vs. WTIUMZZ vs. MULLMZZ vs. NVDGMZZ vs. UPROMZZ vs. TQQQMZZ vs. HOOG
Often compared with XMMO:
XMMO vs. SPMOXMMO vs. XMHQXMMO vs. VOOXMMO vs. MTUMXMMO vs. QMOMXMMO vs. SPGPXMMO vs. RFV

Return for Risk

MZZ vs. XMMO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MZZ
MZZ Risk / Return Rank: 11
Overall Rank
MZZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MZZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
MZZ Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
MZZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 00
Calmar Ratio Rank
MZZ Martin Ratio Rank: 00
Martin Ratio Rank
XMMO
XMMO Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
XMMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMMO Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
XMMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMMO Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

MZZ vs. XMMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort MidCap400 (MZZ) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). 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.

MZZXMMODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-1.15

2.01

-3.16

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-1.65

2.80

-4.45

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.81

1.35

-0.54

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.99

4.53

-5.52

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-1.73

18.56

-20.29

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MZZ vs. XMMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MZZ Sharpe Ratio is -1.15, which is lower than the XMMO Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MZZ and XMMO, 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

MZZXMMODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-1.15

2.01

-3.16

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.43

0.79

-1.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.61

0.89

-1.50

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.60

0.57

-1.17

Drawdowns

MZZ vs. XMMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MZZ drawdown since its inception was -99.90%, which is greater than XMMO's maximum drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MZZ and XMMO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MZZXMMODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-99.90%

-55.37%

-44.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-35.22%

-8.34%

-26.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-62.13%

-24.93%

-37.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-68.64%

-27.91%

-40.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-95.10%

-36.74%

-58.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-99.90%

0.00%

-99.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-86.07%

-9.45%

-76.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

20.39%

2.04%

+18.35%

Volatility

MZZ vs. XMMO - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraShort MidCap400 (MZZ) has a higher volatility of 8.88% compared to Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) at 7.82%. This indicates that MZZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MZZXMMODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.88%

7.82%

+1.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.99%

15.59%

+7.40%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.15%

18.71%

+12.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.16%

21.45%

+17.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

41.39%

22.27%

+19.12%

MZZ vs. XMMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MZZ has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than XMMO's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

MZZ vs. XMMO - Dividend Comparison

MZZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.70%, more than XMMO's 0.61% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MZZ
ProShares UltraShort MidCap400		6.70%5.27%6.36%4.52%0.25%0.00%0.22%1.53%0.53%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XMMO
Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF		0.61%0.78%0.34%0.80%1.43%0.41%0.61%0.60%0.19%0.21%0.22%0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

MZZ and XMMO have a correlation of -0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MZZ has higher volatility (8.88%) compared to XMMO (7.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MZZ dropped -99.90% vs XMMO's -55.37%.

On 10-year performance, XMMO leads with 19.66% vs -25.27% for MZZ. On fees, XMMO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XMMO has been the lower-risk option at 7.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XMMO has performed better with a 19.66% return vs -25.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XMMO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MZZ.

MZZ has the higher dividend yield at 6.70%, compared with 0.61% for XMMO.

MZZ is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while XMMO is Momentum. MZZ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (-200%), while XMMO tracks S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MZZ and 0.35% for XMMO.

XMMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs -1.15), 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 MZZ and XMMO

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