ULE vs. XPP

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

ULE (ProShares Ultra Euro) and XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) are both exchange-traded funds - ULE is a Leveraged Currency fund tracking the USD/EUR Exchange Rate (-200%), while XPP is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ULE returned -2.26%/yr vs -6.62%/yr for XPP. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

ULE vs. XPP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Euro (ULE) and ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ULE achieves a -6.46% return, which is significantly higher than XPP's -19.65% return. Over the past 10 years, ULE has outperformed XPP with an annualized return of -2.26%, while XPP has yielded a comparatively lower -6.62% annualized return.

ULE

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: -1.00%
• 6M: -4.00%
• YTD: -6.46%
• 1Y: -5.53%
• 3Y*: 0.85%
• 5Y*: -3.24%
• 10Y*: -2.26%
• ALL TIME*: -4.07%

XPP

• 1D: 5.58%
• 1M: 10.65%
• 6M: -23.23%
• YTD: -19.65%
• 1Y: -20.13%
• 3Y*: 6.19%
• 5Y*: -18.36%
• 10Y*: -6.62%
• ALL TIME*: -5.11%

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

ULE vs. XPP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ULE ProShares Ultra Euro	-6.46%	25.97%	-11.73%	5.08%	-15.51%	-15.66%	14.74%	-8.90%	-13.40%	23.92%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	-19.65%	45.84%	38.18%	-34.77%	-50.06%	-40.45%	7.07%	24.88%	-31.36%	80.21%

Correlation

The correlation between ULE and XPP is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2009	0.23

Return for Risk

ULE vs. XPP — Risk / Return Rank

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

ULE

ULE Risk / Return Rank: 6
ULE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
ULE Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
ULE Omega Ratio Rank: 6
ULE Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
ULE Martin Ratio Rank: 5

XPP

XPP Risk / Return Rank: 6
XPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
XPP Omega Ratio Rank: 6
XPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
XPP Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

ULE vs. XPP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Euro (ULE) and ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ULE	XPP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.43	-0.50	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.54	-0.51	-0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.94	0.94	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.48	-0.45	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.94	-0.97	+0.03

ULE vs. XPP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ULE Sharpe Ratio is -0.43, which is comparable to the XPP Sharpe Ratio of -0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ULE and XPP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ULE vs. XPP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ULE drawdown since its inception was -72.74%, smaller than the maximum XPP drawdown of -89.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ULE and XPP.

Drawdown Indicators

	ULE	XPP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.74%	-89.90%	+17.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.67%	-44.78%	+33.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.95%	-52.95%	+36.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.59%	-82.87%	+45.28%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.30%	-89.90%	+38.60%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-63.48%	-78.74%	+15.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-46.17%	-48.04%	+1.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.88%	20.77%	-14.89%

Volatility

ULE vs. XPP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra Euro (ULE) is 2.41%, while ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a volatility of 12.90%. This indicates that ULE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XPP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ULE	XPP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.41%	12.90%	-10.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.94%	29.55%	-20.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.98%	40.24%	-27.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.07%	62.82%	-46.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.09%	54.80%	-39.71%

ULE vs. XPP - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ULE and XPP have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

ULE vs. XPP - Dividend Comparison

ULE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.60%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ULE ProShares Ultra Euro	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	2.60%	2.32%	2.96%	2.87%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.81%	1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ULE and XPP in my portfolio?

ULE and XPP have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ULE or XPP?

XPP has higher volatility (12.90%) compared to ULE (2.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ULE dropped -72.74% vs XPP's -89.90%.

Which ETF is better, ULE or XPP?

On 10-year performance, ULE leads with -2.26% vs -6.62% for XPP. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, ULE has been the lower-risk option at 2.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ULE or XPP?

Over the 10-year period, ULE has performed better with a -2.26% return vs -6.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ULE or XPP?

ULE and XPP have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ULE or XPP?

XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 0.00% for ULE.

What is the main difference between ULE and XPP?

ULE is categorized as Leveraged Currency, while XPP is China Equities. ULE tracks USD/EUR Exchange Rate (-200%), while XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ULE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.43 vs -0.50), 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.