SH vs. ALLW

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

SH (ProShares Short S&P500) and ALLW (State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SH is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 (-100%), while ALLW is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by State Street. SH is passively managed, while ALLW is actively managed. Over the past year, SH returned -15.27% vs 20.60% for ALLW. At a correlation of -0.55, they often move in opposite directions. SH charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for ALLW.

Performance

SH vs. ALLW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short S&P500 (SH) and State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SH achieves a -6.16% return, which is significantly lower than ALLW's 6.69% return.

SH

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: -6.16%
• 6M: -5.85%
• 1Y: -15.27%
• 3Y*: -12.34%
• 5Y*: -8.75%
• 10Y*: -12.72%

ALLW

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: -2.98%
• YTD: 6.69%
• 6M: 6.94%
• 1Y: 20.60%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SH vs. ALLW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SH ProShares Short S&P500	-6.16%	-14.24%
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF	6.69%	15.04%

Correlation

The correlation between SH and ALLW 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 Mar 7, 2025	-0.55

The correlation between SH and ALLW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.57 to -0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

SH vs. ALLW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SH	ALLW
Financial Services	91.3%	15.8%
Basic Materials	-	4.6%
Communication Services	-	9.7%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.9%
Energy	-	4.9%
Healthcare	-	8.2%
Industrials	-	9.2%
Real Estate	-	1.8%
Technology	-	26.3%
Utilities	-	2.8%

Return for Risk

SH vs. ALLW — Risk / Return Rank

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

SH

SH Risk / Return Rank: 1
SH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
SH Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
SH Omega Ratio Rank: 1
SH Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
SH Martin Ratio Rank: 1

ALLW

ALLW Risk / Return Rank: 65
ALLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
ALLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
ALLW Omega Ratio Rank: 65
ALLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
ALLW 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.

SH vs. ALLW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short S&P500 (SH) and State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). 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.

	SH	ALLW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.27	1.93	-3.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.84	2.56	-4.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.80	1.35	-0.55
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.84	2.86	-3.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.54	11.98	-13.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SH vs. ALLW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SH Sharpe Ratio is -1.27, which is lower than the ALLW Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SH and ALLW, 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

	SH	ALLW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.27	1.93	-3.20
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.52	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.71	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.58	1.41	-1.99

Drawdowns

SH vs. ALLW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SH drawdown since its inception was -94.66%, which is greater than ALLW's maximum drawdown of -8.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SH and ALLW.

Drawdown Indicators

	SH	ALLW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.66%	-8.78%	-85.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.16%	-7.23%	-10.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.82%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.53%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-76.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.51%	-3.07%	-91.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-67.74%	-1.21%	-66.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.94%	1.72%	+8.22%

Volatility

SH vs. ALLW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Short S&P500 (SH) is 3.70%, while State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) has a volatility of 3.93%. This indicates that SH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ALLW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SH	ALLW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.70%	3.93%	-0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.31%	9.05%	+0.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.08%	10.76%	+1.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.89%	12.68%	+4.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.03%	12.68%	+5.35%

SH vs. ALLW - Expense Ratio Comparison

SH has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than ALLW's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

SH vs. ALLW - Dividend Comparison

SH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.42%, which matches ALLW's 4.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF	4.38%	4.67%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SH ProShares Short S&P500	4.42%	4.49%	6.20%	5.37%	1.08%	0.00%	0.16%	1.76%	1.01%	0.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SH and ALLW in my portfolio?

SH and ALLW 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, SH or ALLW?

ALLW has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to SH (3.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SH dropped -94.66% vs ALLW's -8.78%.

Which ETF is better, SH or ALLW?

On 1-year performance, ALLW leads with 20.60% vs -15.27% for SH. On fees, ALLW is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, SH has been the lower-risk option at 3.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SH or ALLW?

Over the 1-year period, ALLW has performed better with a 20.60% return vs -15.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SH or ALLW?

ALLW is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for SH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SH or ALLW?

SH has the higher dividend yield at 4.42%, compared with 4.38% for ALLW.

What is the main difference between SH and ALLW?

SH is categorized as Inverse Equities, while ALLW is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for SH and 0.85% for ALLW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ALLW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs -1.27), 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.