SBIT vs. SFYF

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SBIT (Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF) and SFYF (SoFi Social 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SBIT is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Bloomberg Bitcoin Index (-200%), while SFYF is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the SoFi Social 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, SBIT returned 72.40% vs 44.18% for SFYF. At a correlation of -0.50, they often move in opposite directions. SBIT charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for SFYF.

Performance

SBIT vs. SFYF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF (SBIT) and SoFi Social 50 ETF (SFYF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SBIT achieves a 44.52% return, which is significantly higher than SFYF's 14.80% return.

SBIT

• 1D: 5.47%
• 1M: 61.07%
• YTD: 44.52%
• 6M: 59.37%
• 1Y: 72.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SFYF

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 8.49%
• YTD: 14.80%
• 6M: 13.77%
• 1Y: 44.18%
• 3Y*: 36.16%
• 5Y*: 12.33%
• 10Y*: —

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

SBIT vs. SFYF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SBIT Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF	44.52%	-25.11%	-73.13%
SFYF SoFi Social 50 ETF	14.80%	30.00%	35.22%

Correlation

The correlation between SBIT and SFYF is -0.57, 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	-0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2024	-0.50

The correlation between SBIT and SFYF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.57 to -0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SBIT vs. SFYF — Risk / Return Rank

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

SBIT

SBIT Risk / Return Rank: 28
SBIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
SBIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
SBIT Omega Ratio Rank: 29
SBIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
SBIT Martin Ratio Rank: 23

SFYF

SFYF Risk / Return Rank: 65
SFYF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
SFYF Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
SFYF Omega Ratio Rank: 67
SFYF Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
SFYF Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

SBIT vs. SFYF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF (SBIT) and SoFi Social 50 ETF (SFYF). 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.

	SBIT	SFYF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.83	2.37	-1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	3.03	-1.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.40	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.52	2.93	-1.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.94	9.71	-6.77
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SBIT vs. SFYF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SBIT Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is lower than the SFYF Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SBIT and SFYF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SBIT	SFYF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83	2.37	-1.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.42	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.45	0.61	-1.06

Drawdowns

SBIT vs. SFYF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SBIT drawdown since its inception was -91.35%, which is greater than SFYF's maximum drawdown of -56.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SBIT and SFYF.

Drawdown Indicators

	SBIT	SFYF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.35%	-56.09%	-35.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-47.94%	-15.18%	-32.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-26.45%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-56.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-77.07%	-1.72%	-75.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-68.56%	-16.57%	-51.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	24.71%	4.57%	+20.14%

Volatility

SBIT vs. SFYF - Volatility Comparison

Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF (SBIT) has a higher volatility of 17.43% compared to SoFi Social 50 ETF (SFYF) at 5.60%. This indicates that SBIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SFYF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SBIT	SFYF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.43%	5.60%	+11.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	67.15%	13.20%	+53.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	87.25%	18.73%	+68.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	97.45%	29.28%	+68.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	97.45%	30.67%	+66.78%

SBIT vs. SFYF - Expense Ratio Comparison

SBIT has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SFYF's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

SBIT vs. SFYF - Dividend Comparison

SBIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.25%, more than SFYF's 0.29% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
SBIT Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF	3.25%	0.52%	1.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SFYF SoFi Social 50 ETF	0.29%	0.33%	0.31%	1.71%	1.19%	0.26%	0.40%	0.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SBIT and SFYF in my portfolio?

SBIT and SFYF have a correlation of -0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SBIT or SFYF?

SBIT has higher volatility (17.43%) compared to SFYF (5.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SBIT dropped -91.35% vs SFYF's -56.09%.

Which ETF is better, SBIT or SFYF?

On 1-year performance, SBIT leads with 72.40% vs 44.18% for SFYF. On fees, SFYF is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, SFYF has been the lower-risk option at 5.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SBIT or SFYF?

Over the 1-year period, SBIT has performed better with a 72.40% return vs 44.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SBIT or SFYF?

SFYF is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SBIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SBIT or SFYF?

SBIT has the higher dividend yield at 3.25%, compared with 0.29% for SFYF.

What is the main difference between SBIT and SFYF?

SBIT is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while SFYF is Large Cap Growth Equities. SBIT tracks Bloomberg Bitcoin Index (-200%), while SFYF tracks SoFi Social 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Toroso Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for SBIT and 0.29% for SFYF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SFYF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs 0.83), 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.