SCDL vs. SSO

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

SCDL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged U.S. Dividend Factor TR ETN) and SSO (ProShares Ultra S&P500) are both Leveraged Equities funds - SCDL tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 (200%) while SSO tracks the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SCDL returned 10.14%/yr vs 17.91%/yr for SSO. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SCDL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for SSO.

Performance

SCDL vs. SSO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged U.S. Dividend Factor TR ETN (SCDL) and ProShares Ultra S&P500 (SSO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCDL achieves a 32.62% return, which is significantly higher than SSO's 12.95% return.

SCDL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -5.94%
• YTD: 32.62%
• 6M: 30.85%
• 1Y: 43.39%
• 3Y*: 21.45%
• 5Y*: 10.14%
• 10Y*: —

SSO

• 1D: -2.86%
• 1M: -3.30%
• YTD: 12.95%
• 6M: 10.86%
• 1Y: 42.28%
• 3Y*: 33.83%
• 5Y*: 17.91%
• 10Y*: 24.26%

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

SCDL vs. SSO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
SCDL ETRACS 2x Leveraged U.S. Dividend Factor TR ETN	32.62%	2.05%	14.99%	0.18%	-13.06%	52.47%
SSO ProShares Ultra S&P500	12.95%	26.19%	43.48%	46.65%	-38.98%	51.09%

Correlation

The correlation between SCDL and SSO is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.69

Over the past year, the correlation between SCDL and SSO has dropped to 0.33 - well below their long-term average of 0.69, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

SCDL vs. SSO — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCDL

SCDL Risk / Return Rank: 66
SCDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
SCDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
SCDL Omega Ratio Rank: 56
SCDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
SCDL Martin Ratio Rank: 61

SSO

SSO Risk / Return Rank: 50
SSO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
SSO Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
SSO Omega Ratio Rank: 48
SSO Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
SSO Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

SCDL vs. SSO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged U.S. Dividend Factor TR ETN (SCDL) and ProShares Ultra S&P500 (SSO). 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.

	SCDL	SSO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	1.71	+0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.91	2.24	+0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.30	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.28	2.34	+1.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.64	9.90	+0.74

SCDL vs. SSO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCDL Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is comparable to the SSO Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCDL and SSO, 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

SCDL vs. SSO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCDL drawdown since its inception was -34.87%, smaller than the maximum SSO drawdown of -84.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCDL and SSO.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCDL	SSO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.87%	-84.67%	+49.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.19%	-18.17%	+7.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.79%	-35.21%	+2.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.87%	-46.73%	+11.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-59.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.94%	-6.70%	+0.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.87%	-19.53%	+7.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.09%	4.28%	-0.19%

Volatility

SCDL vs. SSO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS 2x Leveraged U.S. Dividend Factor TR ETN (SCDL) is 6.45%, while ProShares Ultra S&P500 (SSO) has a volatility of 9.70%. This indicates that SCDL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SSO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SCDL	SSO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.45%	9.70%	-3.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.77%	19.65%	-4.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.73%	24.92%	-3.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.98%	33.85%	-4.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.82%	35.93%	-7.11%

SCDL vs. SSO - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCDL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SSO's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCDL vs. SSO - Dividend Comparison

SCDL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SSO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SCDL ETRACS 2x Leveraged U.S. Dividend Factor TR ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SSO ProShares Ultra S&P500	0.65%	0.68%	0.85%	0.18%	0.50%	0.18%	0.20%	0.50%	0.75%	0.39%	0.51%	0.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SCDL and SSO in my portfolio?

SCDL and SSO have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCDL or SSO?

SSO has higher volatility (9.70%) compared to SCDL (6.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCDL dropped -34.87% vs SSO's -84.67%.

Which ETF is better, SCDL or SSO?

On 5-year performance, SSO leads with 17.91% vs 10.14% for SCDL. On fees, SSO is cheaper at 0.87% per year. On volatility, SCDL has been the lower-risk option at 6.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCDL or SSO?

Over the 5-year period, SSO has performed better with a 17.91% return vs 10.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCDL or SSO?

SSO is cheaper with a 0.87% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SCDL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SCDL or SSO?

SSO has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.00% for SCDL.

What is the main difference between SCDL and SSO?

SCDL tracks Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 (200%), while SSO tracks S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: UBS and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for SCDL and 0.87% for SSO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs 1.71), 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.