UGL vs. GLDW
UGL (ProShares Ultra Gold) and GLDW (Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UGL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold Subindex (200%), while GLDW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by State Street. UGL is passively managed, while GLDW is actively managed. With a 1.00 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. UGL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for GLDW.
Performance
UGL vs. GLDW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UGL achieves a -2.16% return, which is significantly lower than GLDW's 1.00% return.
UGL
- 1D
- -2.00%
- 1M
- -3.96%
- YTD
- -2.16%
- 6M
- 1.78%
- 1Y
- 51.67%
- 3Y*
- 53.18%
- 5Y*
- 27.00%
- 10Y*
- 18.45%
GLDW
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- -2.48%
- YTD
- 1.00%
- 6M
- 3.47%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
UGL vs. GLDW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
UGL ProShares Ultra Gold | -2.16% | 12.73% |
GLDW Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF | 1.00% | 7.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between UGL and GLDW is 1.00 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2025 | 1.00 |
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
UGL vs. GLDW — Risk / Return Rank
UGL
GLDW
UGL vs. GLDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Gold (UGL) 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.
| UGL | GLDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.21 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.38 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.17 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| UGL | GLDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.98 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 0.42 | -0.03 |
Drawdowns
UGL vs. GLDW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UGL drawdown since its inception was -75.93%, which is greater than GLDW's maximum drawdown of -23.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UGL and GLDW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UGL | GLDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -75.93% | -23.59% | -52.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -37.56% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -37.56% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -40.23% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.23% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.56% | -22.51% | -14.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -43.63% | -8.93% | -34.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.35% | — | — |
Volatility
UGL vs. GLDW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UGL | GLDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.03% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 46.81% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 52.91% | 36.90% | +16.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.18% | 36.90% | -0.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.34% | 36.90% | -4.56% |
UGL vs. GLDW - Expense Ratio Comparison
UGL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than GLDW's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
UGL vs. GLDW - Dividend Comparison
UGL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GLDW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.48%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
GLDW Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF | 19.48% | 3.75% |
UGL ProShares Ultra Gold | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 1.00, UGL and GLDW move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, UGL is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
UGL is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for GLDW.
GLDW has the higher dividend yield at 19.48%, compared with 0.00% for UGL.
UGL 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 UGL and 0.99% for GLDW.
Find the right allocation for UGL and GLDW
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