NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO

Last updated Jul 1, 2026

NRGU.TO (BetaPro S&P/TSX Capped Energy 2x Daily Bull ETF) and USSL.TO (Global X Enhanced S&P 500 Index ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Global X. NRGU.TO is actively managed, while USSL.TO is passively managed. Over the past year, NRGU.TO returned 91.01% vs 32.82% for USSL.TO. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BetaPro S&P/TSX Capped Energy 2x Daily Bull ETF (NRGU.TO) and Global X Enhanced S&P 500 Index ETF (USSL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NRGU.TO achieves a 48.99% return, which is significantly higher than USSL.TO's 15.71% return.

NRGU.TO

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: -15.98%
• YTD: 48.99%
• 6M: 47.81%
• 1Y: 91.01%
• 3Y*: 33.54%
• 5Y*: 39.04%
• 10Y*: 3.88%

USSL.TO

• 1D: 0.95%
• 1M: 1.62%
• YTD: 15.71%
• 6M: 15.37%
• 1Y: 32.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NRGU.TO BetaPro S&P/TSX Capped Energy 2x Daily Bull ETF	48.99%	21.43%	-21.54%
USSL.TO Global X Enhanced S&P 500 Index ETF	15.71%	13.42%	21.92%

Correlation

The correlation between NRGU.TO and USSL.TO is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2024	0.01

Return for Risk

NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

NRGU.TO

NRGU.TO Risk / Return Rank: 62
NRGU.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
NRGU.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
NRGU.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 55
NRGU.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
NRGU.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 63

USSL.TO

USSL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 90
USSL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
USSL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
USSL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 89
USSL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
USSL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BetaPro S&P/TSX Capped Energy 2x Daily Bull ETF (NRGU.TO) and Global X Enhanced S&P 500 Index ETF (USSL.TO). 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.

	NRGU.TO	USSL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	2.67	-0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.29	3.64	-1.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.48	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.89	4.52	-1.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.72	16.53	-6.82

NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NRGU.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the USSL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NRGU.TO and USSL.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NRGU.TO drawdown since its inception was -99.71%, which is greater than USSL.TO's maximum drawdown of -23.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NRGU.TO and USSL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	NRGU.TO	USSL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.71%	-23.90%	-75.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.71%	-10.79%	-20.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-51.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.50%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-97.54%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-87.78%	-0.31%	-87.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-83.54%	-3.40%	-80.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.40%	6.55%	+2.85%

Volatility

NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO - Volatility Comparison

BetaPro S&P/TSX Capped Energy 2x Daily Bull ETF (NRGU.TO) has a higher volatility of 16.68% compared to Global X Enhanced S&P 500 Index ETF (USSL.TO) at 5.69%. This indicates that NRGU.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USSL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NRGU.TO	USSL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.68%	5.69%	+10.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.33%	13.28%	+27.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.14%	18.30%	+28.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	57.20%	23.46%	+33.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	66.50%	23.46%	+43.04%

Dividends

NRGU.TO vs. USSL.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither NRGU.TO nor USSL.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NRGU.TO and USSL.TO in my portfolio?

NRGU.TO and USSL.TO have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.