PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
UWM vs. MVV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

UWM vs. MVV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UWM achieves a 31.87% return, which is significantly higher than MVV's 25.92% return. Over the past 10 years, UWM has underperformed MVV with an annualized return of 12.16%, while MVV has yielded a comparatively higher 13.66% annualized return.


UWM

1D
-2.69%
1M
6.41%
YTD
31.87%
6M
28.56%
1Y
76.77%
3Y*
25.03%
5Y*
1.71%
10Y*
12.16%

MVV

1D
-0.14%
1M
7.36%
YTD
25.92%
6M
25.76%
1Y
44.85%
3Y*
22.13%
5Y*
6.59%
10Y*
13.66%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UWM vs. MVV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
31.87%13.59%11.32%22.62%-43.69%23.91%16.57%48.62%-25.89%26.92%
MVV
ProShares Ultra Midcap 400
25.92%3.48%17.75%22.51%-31.96%48.57%6.20%49.50%-25.44%30.81%

Correlation

The correlation between UWM and MVV is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.92

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.94

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.95

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2007

0.95

The correlation between UWM and MVV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

UWM vs. MVV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
UWM
MVV

Industrials

17.7%
25.1%

Technology

17.0%
15.8%

Healthcare

16.5%
8.7%

Financial Services

15.8%
14.3%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
10.6%

Real Estate

6.1%
7.5%

Energy

6.1%
5.5%

Basic Materials

4.8%
4.8%

Utilities

2.9%
3.1%

Communication Services

2.4%
1.0%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
3.7%

Industrials

UWM
17.7%
MVV
25.1%

Technology

UWM
17.0%
MVV
15.8%

Healthcare

UWM
16.5%
MVV
8.7%

Financial Services

UWM
15.8%
MVV
14.3%

Consumer Cyclical

UWM
8.4%
MVV
10.6%

Real Estate

UWM
6.1%
MVV
7.5%

Energy

UWM
6.1%
MVV
5.5%

Basic Materials

UWM
4.8%
MVV
4.8%

Utilities

UWM
2.9%
MVV
3.1%

Communication Services

UWM
2.4%
MVV
1.0%

Consumer Defensive

UWM
2.4%
MVV
3.7%

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

UWM vs. MVV — Risk / Return Rank

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

UWM
UWM Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
UWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
UWM Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
UWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
UWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

MVV
MVV Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
MVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
MVV Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
MVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
MVV Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

UWM vs. MVV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV). 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.


UWMMVVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.54

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.25

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.46

2.55

+0.91

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.85

8.74

+3.11

UWM vs. MVV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UWM Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is higher than the MVV Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UWM and MVV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


UWMMVVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.03

1.45

+0.59

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

0.17

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.26

0.32

-0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.14

0.26

-0.11

Drawdowns

UWM vs. MVV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UWM drawdown since its inception was -88.21%, roughly equal to the maximum MVV drawdown of -85.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UWM and MVV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UWMMVVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-88.21%

-85.54%

-2.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.28%

-17.68%

-4.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-49.79%

-44.80%

-4.99%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.62%

-45.53%

-16.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.46%

-69.19%

-2.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.55%

-0.14%

-3.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.88%

-20.55%

-10.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.50%

5.14%

+1.36%

Volatility

UWM vs. MVV - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) has a higher volatility of 11.45% compared to ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) at 8.53%. This indicates that UWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MVV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UWMMVVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.45%

8.53%

+2.92%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.82%

22.65%

+4.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

38.04%

31.22%

+6.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

45.01%

39.63%

+5.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

46.08%

42.36%

+3.72%

UWM vs. MVV - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both UWM and MVV have an expense ratio of 0.95%.


Dividends

UWM vs. MVV - Dividend Comparison

UWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%, more than MVV's 0.68% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MVV
ProShares Ultra Midcap 400
0.68%0.77%0.39%0.77%0.93%0.16%0.29%0.62%0.62%0.21%0.43%0.17%
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
0.78%1.05%1.16%0.34%0.40%0.00%0.07%0.55%0.41%0.11%0.27%0.23%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, UWM and MVV 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.

UWM has higher volatility (11.45%) compared to MVV (8.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UWM dropped -88.21% vs MVV's -85.54%.

On 10-year performance, MVV leads with 13.66% vs 12.16% for UWM. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, MVV has been the lower-risk option at 8.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, MVV has performed better with a 13.66% return vs 12.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

UWM and MVV have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

UWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.68% for MVV.

UWM tracks Russell 2000 Index (200%), while MVV tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (200%).

UWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.45), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UWM and MVV

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