SMN vs. NOBL
SMN (ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials) and NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SMN is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Basic Materials Index (-200%), while NOBL is a Dividend fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SMN returned -25.09%/yr vs 9.51%/yr for NOBL. At a correlation of -0.79, they often move in opposite directions. SMN charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for NOBL.
Performance
SMN vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SMN achieves a -23.85% return, which is significantly lower than NOBL's 3.51% return. Over the past 10 years, SMN has underperformed NOBL with an annualized return of -25.09%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively higher 9.51% annualized return.
SMN
- 1D
- -0.81%
- 1M
- -4.18%
- YTD
- -23.85%
- 6M
- -27.24%
- 1Y
- -28.88%
- 3Y*
- -17.26%
- 5Y*
- -14.35%
- 10Y*
- -25.09%
NOBL
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 3.51%
- 6M
- 3.45%
- 1Y
- 9.00%
- 3Y*
- 8.01%
- 5Y*
- 5.03%
- 10Y*
- 9.51%
SMN vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SMN ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials | -23.85% | -17.96% | 7.37% | -20.23% | -3.03% | -45.83% | -55.75% | -33.63% | 32.74% | -38.03% |
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 3.51% | 6.84% | 6.72% | 8.09% | -6.52% | 25.46% | 8.35% | 27.39% | -3.26% | 21.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between SMN and NOBL is -0.72, 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 | -0.72 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.80 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2013 | -0.79 |
The correlation between SMN and NOBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.80 to -0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
SMN vs. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank
SMN
NOBL
SMN vs. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials (SMN) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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.
| SMN | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.65 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.87 | 1.14 | -0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.75 | 0.99 | -1.74 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.36 | 2.58 | -3.94 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SMN | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.86 | 0.80 | -1.65 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.36 | 0.35 | -0.72 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.59 | 0.57 | -1.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.54 | 0.64 | -1.18 |
Drawdowns
SMN vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMN drawdown since its inception was -99.92%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMN and NOBL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMN | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.92% | -35.43% | -64.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -38.52% | -9.11% | -29.41% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -53.71% | -15.36% | -38.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -66.05% | -17.92% | -48.13% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -95.39% | -35.43% | -59.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.91% | -5.99% | -93.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -90.55% | -3.48% | -87.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 21.25% | 3.50% | +17.75% |
Volatility
SMN vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials (SMN) has a higher volatility of 11.58% compared to ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) at 2.36%. This indicates that SMN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SMN | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.58% | 2.36% | +9.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.63% | 8.00% | +18.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 33.89% | 11.33% | +22.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 39.54% | 14.38% | +25.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 42.90% | 16.60% | +26.30% |
SMN vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMN has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMN vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison
SMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.62%, more than NOBL's 2.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 2.12% | 2.14% | 2.05% | 2.09% | 1.94% | 1.89% | 2.14% | 1.89% | 2.37% | 1.74% | 2.13% | 2.02% |
SMN ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials | 4.62% | 4.08% | 5.02% | 4.54% | 0.42% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.72% | 0.06% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SMN and NOBL have a correlation of -0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SMN has higher volatility (11.58%) compared to NOBL (2.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMN dropped -99.92% vs NOBL's -35.43%.
On 10-year performance, NOBL leads with 9.51% vs -25.09% for SMN. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 2.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, NOBL has performed better with a 9.51% return vs -25.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SMN.
SMN has the higher dividend yield at 4.62%, compared with 2.12% for NOBL.
SMN is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while NOBL is Dividend. SMN tracks Dow Jones U.S. Basic Materials Index (-200%), while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for SMN and 0.35% for NOBL.
NOBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.80 vs -0.86), 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.
Find the right allocation for SMN and NOBL
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