UMDD vs. NRGU

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

UMDD (ProShares UltraPro MidCap400) and NRGU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - UMDD tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Index (300%) while NRGU tracks the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, UMDD returned 60.12% vs 147.96% for NRGU. Their 0.15 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

UMDD vs. NRGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMDD achieves a 39.73% return, which is significantly lower than NRGU's 139.31% return.

UMDD

• 1D: 3.16%
• 1M: -0.95%
• 6M: 22.93%
• YTD: 39.73%
• 1Y: 60.12%
• 3Y*: 19.36%
• 5Y*: 3.98%
• 10Y*: 10.96%
• ALL TIME*: 19.42%

NRGU

• 1D: -6.93%
• 1M: 40.77%
• 6M: 89.59%
• YTD: 139.31%
• 1Y: 147.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 42.79%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	$4.50M	$4.24M	$3.94M
UMDD ProShares UltraPro MidCap400	$270.14K	$258.68K	$250.88K

UMDD vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UMDD ProShares UltraPro MidCap400	39.73%	-9.02%
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	139.31%	-30.00%

Correlation

The correlation between UMDD and NRGU is -0.04, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.15

The correlation between UMDD and NRGU shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.15 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

UMDD vs. NRGU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UMDD	NRGU
Industrials	25.3%	-
Technology	17.2%	-
Financial Services	13.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.5%	-
Healthcare	9.0%	-
Real Estate	7.2%	-
Basic Materials	4.8%	-
Energy	4.6%	100.0%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	-
Utilities	2.9%	-
Communication Services	1.5%	-

Return for Risk

UMDD vs. NRGU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

UMDD

UMDD Risk / Return Rank: 55
UMDD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
UMDD Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
UMDD Omega Ratio Rank: 49
UMDD Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
UMDD Martin Ratio Rank: 62

NRGU

NRGU Risk / Return Rank: 73
NRGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
NRGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
NRGU Omega Ratio Rank: 67
NRGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
NRGU Martin Ratio Rank: 61

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

UMDD vs. NRGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). 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	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	1.93	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	2.32	-0.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.29	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.32	3.39	-1.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.72	7.61	+0.11

UMDD vs. NRGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMDD Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is lower than the NRGU Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMDD and NRGU, 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. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMDD drawdown since its inception was -86.24%, which is greater than NRGU's maximum drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMDD and NRGU.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMDD	NRGU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.24%	-57.50%	-28.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.04%	-43.89%	+17.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-60.33%	—	—
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	-5.06%	-17.46%	+12.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.43%	-25.72%	+2.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.81%	19.53%	-11.72%

Volatility

UMDD vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares UltraPro MidCap400 (UMDD) is 11.11%, while MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) has a volatility of 24.63%. This indicates that UMDD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NRGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMDD	NRGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.11%	24.63%	-13.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.07%	64.77%	-29.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.12%	77.42%	-30.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	58.72%	88.56%	-29.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	62.12%	88.56%	-26.44%

UMDD vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

UMDD vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	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 NRGU in my portfolio?

UMDD and NRGU have a correlation of -0.04, 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 NRGU?

NRGU has higher volatility (24.63%) compared to UMDD (11.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMDD dropped -86.24% vs NRGU's -57.50%.

Which ETF is better, UMDD or NRGU?

On 1-year performance, NRGU leads with 147.96% vs 60.12% for UMDD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, UMDD has been the lower-risk option at 11.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UMDD or NRGU?

Over the 1-year period, NRGU has performed better with a 147.96% return vs 60.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UMDD or NRGU?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between UMDD and NRGU?

UMDD tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (300%), while NRGU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and BMO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NRGU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.28), 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.