UMDD vs. FLYU

Last updated Jul 22, 2026

UMDD (ProShares UltraPro MidCap400) and FLYU (MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both Leveraged Equities funds - UMDD tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Index (300%) while FLYU tracks the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, UMDD returned 17.74%/yr vs -1.34%/yr for FLYU. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

UMDD vs. FLYU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMDD achieves a 38.51% return, which is significantly higher than FLYU's -17.85% return.

UMDD

• 1D: 3.00%
• 1M: -1.43%
• 6M: 22.31%
• YTD: 38.51%
• 1Y: 50.43%
• 3Y*: 17.74%
• 5Y*: 4.51%
• 10Y*: 11.03%
• ALL TIME*: 19.40%

FLYU

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: -9.91%
• 6M: -9.30%
• YTD: -17.85%
• 1Y: -22.80%
• 3Y*: -1.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.87%

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

UMDD vs. FLYU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
UMDD ProShares UltraPro MidCap400	38.51%	-2.57%	19.68%	27.21%	12.32%
FLYU MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs	-17.85%	-2.29%	33.00%	111.16%	-19.09%

Correlation

The correlation between UMDD and FLYU is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2022	0.75

The correlation between UMDD and FLYU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

UMDD vs. FLYU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UMDD	FLYU
Industrials	25.3%	17.7%
Technology	17.2%	16.4%
Financial Services	13.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.5%	52.6%
Healthcare	9.0%	-
Real Estate	7.2%	0.1%
Basic Materials	4.8%	-
Energy	4.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	-
Utilities	2.9%	-
Communication Services	1.5%	13.2%

Return for Risk

UMDD vs. FLYU — Risk / Return Rank

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

UMDD

UMDD Risk / Return Rank: 45
UMDD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
UMDD Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
UMDD Omega Ratio Rank: 39
UMDD Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
UMDD Martin Ratio Rank: 51

FLYU

FLYU Risk / Return Rank: 7
FLYU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
FLYU Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
FLYU Omega Ratio Rank: 9
FLYU Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
FLYU 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.

UMDD vs. FLYU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU). 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.

	UMDD	FLYU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.07	-0.31	+1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.69	0.03	+1.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.00	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.95	-0.44	+2.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.43	-0.88	+7.31

UMDD vs. FLYU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMDD Sharpe Ratio is 1.07, which is higher than the FLYU Sharpe Ratio of -0.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMDD and FLYU, 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

UMDD vs. FLYU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMDD drawdown since its inception was -86.24%, which is greater than FLYU's maximum drawdown of -69.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMDD and FLYU.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMDD	FLYU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.24%	-69.00%	-17.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.04%	-52.33%	+26.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-60.33%	-69.00%	+8.67%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-64.61%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-86.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.90%	-34.84%	+28.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.46%	-26.59%	+3.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.87%	25.94%	-18.07%

Volatility

UMDD vs. FLYU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) is 10.22%, while MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs (FLYU) has a volatility of 17.61%. This indicates that UMDD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLYU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMDD	FLYU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.22%	17.61%	-7.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.30%	61.02%	-25.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.25%	74.53%	-27.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	58.69%	82.89%	-24.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	62.10%	82.89%	-20.79%

UMDD vs. FLYU - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both UMDD and FLYU have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

UMDD vs. FLYU - Dividend Comparison

UMDD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, while FLYU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLYU MicroSectors Travel 3X Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UMDD ProShares UltraPro MidCap400	0.67%	1.00%	0.76%	0.19%	0.49%	0.06%	0.08%	0.64%	0.32%	0.00%	0.03%	0.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UMDD and FLYU in my portfolio?

UMDD and FLYU have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UMDD or FLYU?

FLYU has higher volatility (17.61%) compared to UMDD (10.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMDD dropped -86.24% vs FLYU's -69.00%.

Which ETF is better, UMDD or FLYU?

On 3-year performance, UMDD leads with 17.74% vs -1.34% for FLYU. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, UMDD has been the lower-risk option at 10.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UMDD or FLYU?

Over the 3-year period, UMDD has performed better with a 17.74% return vs -1.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UMDD or FLYU?

UMDD and FLYU have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UMDD or FLYU?

UMDD has the higher dividend yield at 0.67%, compared with 0.00% for FLYU.

What is the main difference between UMDD and FLYU?

UMDD tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (300%), while FLYU tracks MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and REX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UMDD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.07 vs -0.31), 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.