PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SAA vs. UWM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SAA achieves a 28.22% return, which is significantly lower than UWM's 31.87% return. Over the past 10 years, SAA has underperformed UWM with an annualized return of 11.43%, while UWM has yielded a comparatively higher 12.16% annualized return.


SAA

1D
-1.69%
1M
3.02%
YTD
28.22%
6M
25.09%
1Y
58.28%
3Y*
17.67%
5Y*
1.22%
10Y*
11.43%

UWM

1D
-2.69%
1M
6.41%
YTD
31.87%
6M
28.56%
1Y
76.77%
3Y*
25.03%
5Y*
1.71%
10Y*
12.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SAA vs. UWM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SAA
ProShares Ultra SmallCap600
28.22%0.29%5.60%21.32%-36.17%51.77%-1.79%42.39%-23.00%23.94%
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
31.87%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 26, 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

Financial Services

16.9%
15.8%

Industrials

15.5%
17.7%

Technology

15.5%
17.0%

Consumer Cyclical

13.4%
8.4%

Healthcare

11.0%
16.5%

Real Estate

7.7%
6.1%

Energy

5.9%
6.1%

Basic Materials

5.1%
4.8%

Communication Services

3.6%
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
2.4%

Utilities

2.0%
2.9%

Financial Services

SAA
16.9%
UWM
15.8%

Industrials

SAA
15.5%
UWM
17.7%

Technology

SAA
15.5%
UWM
17.0%

Consumer Cyclical

SAA
13.4%
UWM
8.4%

Healthcare

SAA
11.0%
UWM
16.5%

Real Estate

SAA
7.7%
UWM
6.1%

Energy

SAA
5.9%
UWM
6.1%

Basic Materials

SAA
5.1%
UWM
4.8%

Communication Services

SAA
3.6%
UWM
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

SAA
3.5%
UWM
2.4%

Utilities

SAA
2.0%
UWM
2.9%

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

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: 5252
Overall Rank
SAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
SAA Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
SAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
SAA Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank

UWM
UWM Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
UWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
UWM Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
UWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
UWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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.

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.


SAAUWMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.64

2.03

-0.40

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.31

2.63

-0.32

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.31

-0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.22

3.46

-0.25

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

10.38

11.85

-1.47

SAA vs. UWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAA Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the UWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


SAAUWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.64

2.03

-0.40

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.03

0.04

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.25

0.26

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.18

0.14

+0.04

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SAAUWMDifference

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

-4.35%

-3.55%

-0.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-27.42%

-30.88%

+3.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.63%

6.50%

-0.87%

Volatility

SAA vs. UWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) is 8.56%, while ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) has a volatility of 11.45%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SAAUWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.56%

11.45%

-2.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.89%

26.82%

-2.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

35.92%

38.04%

-2.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

43.54%

45.01%

-1.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

46.13%

46.08%

+0.05%

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 0.79%, more than UWM's 0.78% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
SAA
ProShares Ultra SmallCap600
0.79%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
0.78%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


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.

UWM has higher volatility (11.45%) compared to SAA (8.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SAA dropped -87.39% vs UWM's -88.21%.

On 10-year performance, UWM leads with 12.16% vs 11.43% for SAA. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, SAA has been the lower-risk option at 8.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, UWM has performed better with a 12.16% return vs 11.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

SAA has the higher dividend yield at 0.79%, compared with 0.78% for UWM.

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

UWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.64), 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 SAA and UWM

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