SAA vs. UWM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

SAA (ProShares Ultra SmallCap600) and UWM (ProShares Ultra Russell2000) are both Leveraged Equities funds from ProShares - SAA tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Index (200%) while UWM tracks the Russell 2000 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SAA returned 12.61%/yr vs 13.44%/yr for UWM. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

SAA vs. UWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) and ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SAA achieves a 36.86% return, which is significantly lower than UWM's 38.71% return. Over the past 10 years, SAA has underperformed UWM with an annualized return of 12.61%, while UWM has yielded a comparatively higher 13.44% annualized return.

SAA

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 8.20%
• YTD: 36.86%
• 6M: 31.50%
• 1Y: 66.49%
• 3Y*: 21.67%
• 5Y*: 2.49%
• 10Y*: 12.61%

UWM

• 1D: -1.93%
• 1M: 6.86%
• YTD: 38.71%
• 6M: 32.01%
• 1Y: 81.03%
• 3Y*: 27.92%
• 5Y*: 1.93%
• 10Y*: 13.44%

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

SAA vs. UWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SAA ProShares Ultra SmallCap600	36.86%	0.29%	5.60%	21.32%	-36.17%	51.77%	-1.79%	42.39%	-23.00%	23.94%
UWM ProShares Ultra Russell2000	38.71%	13.59%	11.32%	22.62%	-43.69%	23.91%	16.57%	48.62%	-25.89%	26.92%

Correlation

The correlation between SAA and UWM is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2007	0.92

The correlation between SAA and UWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

SAA vs. UWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SAA	UWM
Technology	17.1%	19.1%
Financial Services	16.5%	15.5%
Industrials	15.2%	17.8%
Consumer Cyclical	13.1%	7.9%
Healthcare	11.0%	16.3%
Real Estate	7.6%	5.9%
Energy	5.4%	5.4%
Basic Materials	5.0%	4.7%
Communication Services	3.7%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	2.2%
Utilities	1.9%	2.7%

Return for Risk

SAA vs. UWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

SAA

SAA Risk / Return Rank: 63
SAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
SAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
SAA Omega Ratio Rank: 51
SAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
SAA Martin Ratio Rank: 69

UWM

UWM Risk / Return Rank: 65
UWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
UWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
UWM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
UWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
UWM Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

SAA vs. UWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) and ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM). 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.

	SAA	UWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.85	2.09	-0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.55	2.65	-0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.31	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.67	3.66	+0.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.94	12.47	-0.53

SAA vs. UWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAA Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is comparable to the UWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SAA and UWM, 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

SAA vs. UWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SAA drawdown since its inception was -87.39%, roughly equal to the maximum UWM drawdown of -88.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAA and UWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	SAA	UWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.39%	-88.21%	+0.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.21%	-22.28%	+4.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-50.84%	-49.79%	-1.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.37%	-61.62%	+6.25%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-74.54%	-71.46%	-3.08%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.69%	-1.93%	+1.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.35%	-30.80%	+3.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.59%	6.52%	-0.93%

Volatility

SAA vs. UWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) is 9.60%, while ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) has a volatility of 13.03%. This indicates that SAA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SAA	UWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.60%	13.03%	-3.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.43%	28.39%	-3.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.09%	39.12%	-3.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.53%	45.16%	-1.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.15%	46.13%	+0.02%

SAA vs. UWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both SAA and UWM have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

SAA vs. UWM - Dividend Comparison

SAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.74%, which matches UWM's 0.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SAA ProShares Ultra SmallCap600	0.74%	1.05%	1.36%	0.88%	0.46%	0.00%	0.03%	0.35%	0.27%	0.00%	0.14%	0.00%
UWM ProShares Ultra Russell2000	0.74%	1.05%	1.16%	0.34%	0.40%	0.00%	0.07%	0.55%	0.41%	0.11%	0.27%	0.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SAA and UWM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, SAA and UWM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, SAA or UWM?

UWM has higher volatility (13.03%) compared to SAA (9.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SAA dropped -87.39% vs UWM's -88.21%.

Which ETF is better, SAA or UWM?

On 10-year performance, UWM leads with 13.44% vs 12.61% for SAA. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, SAA has been the lower-risk option at 9.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SAA or UWM?

Over the 10-year period, UWM has performed better with a 13.44% return vs 12.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SAA or UWM?

SAA and UWM have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SAA or UWM?

SAA and UWM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.74%.

What is the main difference between SAA and UWM?

SAA tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Index (200%), while UWM tracks Russell 2000 Index (200%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.85), 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.