QTAP vs. UCO
QTAP (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - QTAP is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Innovator, while UCO is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). QTAP is actively managed, while UCO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QTAP returned 13.77%/yr vs 21.18%/yr for UCO. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QTAP charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.
Performance
QTAP vs. UCO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QTAP achieves a 14.58% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 139.34% return.
QTAP
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- 2.33%
- YTD
- 14.58%
- 6M
- 15.43%
- 1Y
- 25.33%
- 3Y*
- 21.09%
- 5Y*
- 13.77%
- 10Y*
- —
UCO
- 1D
- -3.93%
- 1M
- -5.57%
- YTD
- 139.34%
- 6M
- 124.58%
- 1Y
- 115.57%
- 3Y*
- 24.38%
- 5Y*
- 21.18%
- 10Y*
- -11.98%
QTAP vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QTAP Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April | 14.58% | 19.36% | 17.34% | 43.32% | -25.87% | 15.63% |
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil | 139.34% | -29.75% | 5.36% | -13.89% | 39.71% | 53.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between QTAP and UCO is -0.24, 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 | -0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2021 | 0.04 |
The correlation between QTAP and UCO shifts across timeframes, from -0.24 (1 year) to 0.05 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
QTAP vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank
QTAP
UCO
QTAP vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). 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.
| QTAP | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.54 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +6.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.21 | 1.31 | +0.90 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 15.04 | 3.34 | +11.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 79.40 | 6.32 | +73.07 |
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
| QTAP | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.57 | 2.03 | +2.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 | 0.36 | +0.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.17 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.75 | -0.34 | +1.09 |
Drawdowns
QTAP vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QTAP drawdown since its inception was -29.44%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTAP and UCO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QTAP | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.44% | -99.95% | +70.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.69% | -34.77% | +33.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.03% | -50.38% | +37.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.44% | -67.24% | +37.80% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -98.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.18% | -99.26% | +99.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.03% | -85.49% | +80.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.32% | 18.34% | -18.02% |
Volatility
QTAP vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) is 1.30%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 20.99%. This indicates that QTAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UCO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QTAP | UCO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.30% | 20.99% | -19.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.98% | 46.57% | -42.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.56% | 57.26% | -51.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.88% | 59.81% | -40.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.77% | 71.35% | -52.58% |
QTAP vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison
QTAP has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
QTAP vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison
Neither QTAP nor UCO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
QTAP and UCO have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UCO has higher volatility (20.99%) compared to QTAP (1.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTAP dropped -29.44% vs UCO's -99.95%.
On 5-year performance, UCO leads with 21.18% vs 13.77% for QTAP. On fees, QTAP is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTAP has been the lower-risk option at 1.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, UCO has performed better with a 21.18% return vs 13.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QTAP is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.
QTAP and UCO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
QTAP is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while UCO is Leveraged Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QTAP and 0.95% for UCO.
QTAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.57 vs 2.03), 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 QTAP and UCO
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