UCO vs. GLDW

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) and GLDW (Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UCO is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%), while GLDW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by State Street. UCO is passively managed, while GLDW is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. UCO charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for GLDW.

Performance

UCO vs. GLDW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) and Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF (GLDW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UCO achieves a 142.55% return, which is significantly higher than GLDW's 2.22% return.

UCO

• 1D: 2.52%
• 1M: 0.21%
• YTD: 142.55%
• 6M: 133.13%
• 1Y: 118.05%
• 3Y*: 24.78%
• 5Y*: 21.76%
• 10Y*: -11.55%

GLDW

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: -3.61%
• YTD: 2.22%
• 6M: 4.68%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UCO vs. GLDW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil	142.55%	-8.70%
GLDW Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF	2.22%	7.63%

Correlation

The correlation between UCO and GLDW is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2025	-0.05

Return for Risk

UCO vs. GLDW — Risk / Return Rank

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

UCO

UCO Risk / Return Rank: 56
UCO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
UCO Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
UCO Omega Ratio Rank: 50
UCO Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
UCO Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

UCO vs. GLDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) and Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF (GLDW). 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.

	UCO	GLDW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.78	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.17	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UCO	GLDW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.08	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.16	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.34	0.49	-0.83

Drawdowns

UCO vs. GLDW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UCO drawdown since its inception was -99.95%, which is greater than GLDW's maximum drawdown of -23.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCO and GLDW.

Drawdown Indicators

	UCO	GLDW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.95%	-23.59%	-76.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.77%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-50.38%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-67.24%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-98.75%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.25%	-21.57%	-77.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-85.48%	-8.84%	-76.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.32%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	UCO	GLDW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	22.10%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	46.40%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	57.35%	36.99%	+20.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	59.77%	36.99%	+22.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	71.36%	36.99%	+34.37%

UCO vs. GLDW - Expense Ratio Comparison

UCO has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than GLDW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

UCO vs. GLDW - Dividend Comparison

UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GLDW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.25%.

Position	TTM	2025
GLDW Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF	19.25%	3.75%
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UCO and GLDW in my portfolio?

UCO and GLDW have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, UCO or GLDW?

On fees, UCO is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, UCO or GLDW?

UCO is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for GLDW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UCO or GLDW?

GLDW has the higher dividend yield at 19.25%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.

What is the main difference between UCO and GLDW?

UCO is categorized as Leveraged Commodities, while GLDW is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for UCO and 0.99% for GLDW.