UMDD vs. NOBL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UMDD (ProShares UltraPro MidCap400) and NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UMDD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Index (300%), while NOBL is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UMDD returned 11.97%/yr vs 9.51%/yr for NOBL. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. UMDD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for NOBL.

Performance

UMDD vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMDD achieves a 37.59% return, which is significantly higher than NOBL's 3.51% return. Over the past 10 years, UMDD has outperformed NOBL with an annualized return of 11.97%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively lower 9.51% annualized return.

UMDD

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 10.87%
• YTD: 37.59%
• 6M: 37.25%
• 1Y: 65.82%
• 3Y*: 25.91%
• 5Y*: 2.33%
• 10Y*: 11.97%

NOBL

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 1.01%
• YTD: 3.51%
• 6M: 3.45%
• 1Y: 9.00%
• 3Y*: 8.01%
• 5Y*: 5.03%
• 10Y*: 9.51%

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

UMDD vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UMDD ProShares UltraPro MidCap400	37.59%	-2.57%	19.68%	27.21%	-49.60%	72.27%	-17.30%	78.90%	-40.29%	49.17%
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF	3.51%	6.84%	6.72%	8.09%	-6.52%	25.46%	8.35%	27.39%	-3.26%	21.02%

Correlation

The correlation between UMDD and NOBL is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2013	0.83

The correlation between UMDD and NOBL shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.83 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

UMDD vs. NOBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UMDD	NOBL
Industrials	13.6%	20.3%
Technology	9.1%	3.6%
Financial Services	7.5%	12.4%
Consumer Cyclical	5.2%	5.1%
Healthcare	4.8%	9.7%
Real Estate	4.1%	4.6%
Energy	2.9%	3.4%
Basic Materials	2.6%	10.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	23.5%
Utilities	1.6%	6.4%
Communication Services	0.5%	-

Return for Risk

UMDD vs. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

UMDD

UMDD Risk / Return Rank: 44
UMDD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
UMDD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
UMDD Omega Ratio Rank: 37
UMDD Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
UMDD Martin Ratio Rank: 50

NOBL

NOBL Risk / Return Rank: 22
NOBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
NOBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
NOBL Omega Ratio Rank: 20
NOBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
NOBL Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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.

	UMDD	NOBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.42	0.80	+0.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.04	1.24	+0.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.14	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.54	0.99	+1.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.51	2.58	+5.93
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UMDD vs. NOBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMDD Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is higher than the NOBL Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMDD and NOBL, 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

	UMDD	NOBL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.42	0.80	+0.62
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.04	0.35	-0.31
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.19	0.57	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	0.64	-0.32

Drawdowns

UMDD vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMDD drawdown since its inception was -86.24%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMDD and NOBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMDD	NOBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.24%	-35.43%	-50.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.04%	-9.11%	-16.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-60.33%	-15.36%	-44.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-64.61%	-17.92%	-46.69%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-86.24%	-35.43%	-50.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.77%	-5.99%	+0.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.61%	-3.48%	-20.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.76%	3.50%	+4.26%

Volatility

UMDD vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) has a higher volatility of 13.48% compared to ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) at 2.36%. This indicates that UMDD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMDD	NOBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.48%	2.36%	+11.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.23%	8.00%	+26.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	46.79%	11.33%	+35.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	58.91%	14.38%	+44.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	62.28%	16.60%	+45.68%

UMDD vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

UMDD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

UMDD vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison

UMDD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%, less than NOBL's 2.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF	2.12%	2.14%	2.05%	2.09%	1.94%	1.89%	2.14%	1.89%	2.37%	1.74%	2.13%	2.02%
UMDD ProShares UltraPro MidCap400	0.76%	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 NOBL in my portfolio?

UMDD and NOBL have a correlation of 0.69, 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 NOBL?

UMDD has higher volatility (13.48%) compared to NOBL (2.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMDD dropped -86.24% vs NOBL's -35.43%.

Which ETF is better, UMDD or NOBL?

On 10-year performance, UMDD leads with 11.97% vs 9.51% for NOBL. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 2.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UMDD or NOBL?

Over the 10-year period, UMDD has performed better with a 11.97% return vs 9.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UMDD or NOBL?

NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UMDD.

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

NOBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 0.76% for UMDD.

What is the main difference between UMDD and NOBL?

UMDD is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while NOBL is S&P 500. UMDD tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (300%), while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for UMDD and 0.35% for NOBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UMDD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.42 vs 0.80), 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.