PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RZV vs. UCO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RZV vs. UCO

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

RZV (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - RZV is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Value, while UCO is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RZV returned 10.25%/yr vs -12.52%/yr for UCO. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RZV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.

Performance

RZV vs. UCO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RZV achieves a 17.55% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 131.94% return. Over the past 10 years, RZV has outperformed UCO with an annualized return of 10.25%, while UCO has yielded a comparatively lower -12.52% annualized return.

RZV

1D
-1.48%
1M
1.14%
YTD
17.55%
6M
16.15%
1Y
43.07%
3Y*
16.98%
5Y*
8.80%
10Y*
10.25%

UCO

1D
-3.09%
1M
3.56%
YTD
131.94%
6M
114.50%
1Y
106.12%
3Y*
23.38%
5Y*
20.42%
10Y*
-12.52%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RZV vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RZV
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF		17.55%8.65%5.06%22.97%-6.80%45.95%-3.88%22.29%-19.66%1.25%
UCO
ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil		131.94%-29.75%5.36%-13.89%39.71%139.26%-92.91%53.83%-43.26%0.34%

Correlation

The correlation between RZV and UCO is -0.17, 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

-0.17

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

0.04

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

0.18

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

0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 26, 2008

0.34

The correlation between RZV and UCO shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to 0.34 (all time), 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.

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF

ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil

Often compared with RZV:
RZV vs. AVUVRZV vs. RWJRZV vs. RPVRZV vs. VBRRZV vs. IJRRZV vs. PSCCRZV vs. SPY
Often compared with UCO:
UCO vs. USOUCO vs. SCOUCO vs. OILUUCO vs. BOILUCO vs. ERXUCO vs. LABUUCO vs. OIH

Return for Risk

RZV vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RZV
RZV Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
RZV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RZV Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
RZV Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
RZV Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
RZV Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank
UCO
UCO Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
UCO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UCO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
UCO Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
UCO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
UCO Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
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.

RZV vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) 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.

RZVUCODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.09
1.86

+0.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.96
2.27

+0.68

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.29

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.44

3.07

+0.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.21

5.80

+5.41

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

RZV vs. UCO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RZV Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the UCO Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RZV and UCO, 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

RZVUCODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.09

1.86

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.36

0.34

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.38

-0.18

+0.56

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

-0.35

+0.62

Drawdowns

RZV vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RZV drawdown since its inception was -77.11%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RZV and UCO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RZVUCODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-77.11%

-99.95%

+22.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.56%

-34.77%

+22.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.81%

-50.38%

+20.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.81%

-67.24%

+37.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-60.42%

-98.75%

+38.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.48%

-99.28%

+97.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.60%

-85.49%

+71.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.85%

18.36%

-14.51%

Volatility

RZV vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF (RZV) is 5.48%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 17.06%. This indicates that RZV 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

RZVUCODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.48%

17.06%

-11.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.80%

46.72%

-32.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.71%

57.32%

-36.61%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.37%

59.80%

-35.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.02%

71.35%

-44.33%

RZV vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RZV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

RZV vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison

RZV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, while UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RZV
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF		1.35%1.59%1.14%1.13%1.43%0.86%0.63%1.03%2.03%1.02%0.46%1.24%
UCO
ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

RZV and UCO have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UCO has higher volatility (17.06%) compared to RZV (5.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RZV dropped -77.11% vs UCO's -99.95%.

On 10-year performance, RZV leads with 10.25% vs -12.52% for UCO. On fees, RZV is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RZV has been the lower-risk option at 5.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RZV has performed better with a 10.25% return vs -12.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RZV is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.

RZV has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.

RZV is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while UCO is Leveraged Commodities. RZV tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Value, while UCO tracks Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RZV and 0.95% for UCO.

RZV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.86), 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 RZV 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