UCYB vs. HOOG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UCYB (ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Cybersecurity) and HOOG (Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. UCYB is passively managed, while HOOG is actively managed. Over the past year, UCYB returned 40.41% vs -29.31% for HOOG. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UCYB charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for HOOG.

Performance

UCYB vs. HOOG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Cybersecurity (UCYB) and Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF (HOOG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UCYB achieves a 54.17% return, which is significantly higher than HOOG's -60.40% return.

UCYB

• 1D: -5.91%
• 1M: 69.42%
• YTD: 54.17%
• 6M: 42.88%
• 1Y: 40.41%
• 3Y*: 44.52%
• 5Y*: 18.61%
• 10Y*: —

HOOG

• 1D: -12.13%
• 1M: 10.59%
• YTD: -60.40%
• 6M: -72.73%
• 1Y: -29.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UCYB vs. HOOG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UCYB ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Cybersecurity	54.17%	10.13%
HOOG Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF	-60.40%	291.44%

Correlation

The correlation between UCYB and HOOG is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025	0.47

Return for Risk

UCYB vs. HOOG — Risk / Return Rank

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

UCYB

UCYB Risk / Return Rank: 23
UCYB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
UCYB Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
UCYB Omega Ratio Rank: 26
UCYB Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
UCYB Martin Ratio Rank: 19

HOOG

HOOG Risk / Return Rank: 9
HOOG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
HOOG Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
HOOG Omega Ratio Rank: 13
HOOG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
HOOG Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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.

UCYB vs. HOOG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Cybersecurity (UCYB) and Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF (HOOG). 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.

	UCYB	HOOG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.82	-0.22	+1.04
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.37	0.64	+0.74
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.07	+0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.94	-0.34	+1.28
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.10	-0.55	+2.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UCYB vs. HOOG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UCYB Sharpe Ratio is 0.82, which is higher than the HOOG Sharpe Ratio of -0.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UCYB and HOOG, 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

	UCYB	HOOG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82	-0.22	+1.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	0.31	0.00

Drawdowns

UCYB vs. HOOG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UCYB drawdown since its inception was -62.69%, smaller than the maximum HOOG drawdown of -86.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCYB and HOOG.

Drawdown Indicators

	UCYB	HOOG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.69%	-86.94%	+24.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-43.04%	-86.94%	+43.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.04%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-62.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.15%	-81.53%	+75.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.48%	-37.56%	+10.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	19.32%	53.22%	-33.90%

Volatility

UCYB vs. HOOG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Cybersecurity (UCYB) is 22.00%, while Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF (HOOG) has a volatility of 41.51%. This indicates that UCYB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HOOG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UCYB	HOOG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	22.00%	41.51%	-19.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	42.13%	100.64%	-58.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	49.49%	137.15%	-87.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	49.95%	144.88%	-94.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	49.64%	144.88%	-95.24%

UCYB vs. HOOG - Expense Ratio Comparison

UCYB has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than HOOG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

UCYB vs. HOOG - Dividend Comparison

UCYB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, less than HOOG's 31.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
HOOG Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF	31.07%	12.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UCYB ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Cybersecurity	1.41%	1.90%	2.16%	0.56%	0.00%	0.91%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UCYB and HOOG in my portfolio?

UCYB and HOOG have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UCYB or HOOG?

HOOG has higher volatility (41.51%) compared to UCYB (22.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCYB dropped -62.69% vs HOOG's -86.94%.

Which ETF is better, UCYB or HOOG?

On 1-year performance, UCYB leads with 40.41% vs -29.31% for HOOG. On fees, HOOG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, UCYB has been the lower-risk option at 22.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UCYB or HOOG?

Over the 1-year period, UCYB has performed better with a 40.41% return vs -29.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UCYB or HOOG?

HOOG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for UCYB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UCYB or HOOG?

HOOG has the higher dividend yield at 31.07%, compared with 1.41% for UCYB.

What is the main difference between UCYB and HOOG?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for UCYB and 0.75% for HOOG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UCYB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.82 vs -0.22), 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.