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

Performance

UWM vs. ULE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and ProShares Ultra Euro (ULE). 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 36.19% return, which is significantly higher than ULE's -3.77% return. Over the past 10 years, UWM has outperformed ULE with an annualized return of 12.82%, while ULE has yielded a comparatively lower -2.46% annualized return.


UWM

1D
1.73%
1M
10.49%
YTD
36.19%
6M
28.56%
1Y
83.09%
3Y*
23.58%
5Y*
1.55%
10Y*
12.82%

ULE

1D
0.24%
1M
-1.10%
YTD
-3.77%
6M
-3.85%
1Y
-1.53%
3Y*
3.78%
5Y*
-3.70%
10Y*
-2.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UWM vs. ULE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
36.19%13.59%11.32%22.62%-43.69%23.91%16.57%48.62%-25.89%26.92%
ULE
ProShares Ultra Euro
-3.77%25.97%-11.73%5.08%-15.51%-15.66%14.74%-8.90%-13.40%23.92%

Correlation

The correlation between UWM and ULE is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.31

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

0.25

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

0.28

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

0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 25, 2008

0.20

The correlation between UWM and ULE shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (10 years) to 0.31 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. ULE — Risk / Return Rank

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

UWM
UWM Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
UWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
UWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
UWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
UWM Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

ULE
ULE Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
ULE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ULE Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
ULE Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
ULE Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
ULE Martin Ratio Rank: 77
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. ULE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


UWMULEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.68

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

0.98

+0.32

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.44

-0.21

+3.66

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.74

-0.44

+12.19

UWM vs. ULE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is higher than the ULE Sharpe Ratio of -0.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UWM and ULE, 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...

Drawdowns

UWM vs. ULE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UWM drawdown since its inception was -88.21%, which is greater than ULE's maximum drawdown of -72.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UWM and ULE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UWMULEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-88.21%

-72.74%

-15.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.28%

-10.40%

-11.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-49.79%

-17.44%

-32.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.62%

-39.01%

-22.61%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.46%

-51.30%

-20.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.39%

-62.43%

+62.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.84%

-46.08%

+15.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.53%

4.99%

+1.54%

Volatility

UWM vs. ULE - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) has a higher volatility of 14.29% compared to ProShares Ultra Euro (ULE) at 2.37%. This indicates that UWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ULE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UWMULEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.29%

2.37%

+11.92%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.35%

8.83%

+19.52%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

39.11%

13.28%

+25.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

45.18%

16.12%

+29.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

46.16%

15.21%

+30.95%

UWM vs. ULE - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

UWM vs. ULE - Dividend Comparison

UWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%, while ULE has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ULE
ProShares Ultra Euro
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
UWM
ProShares Ultra Russell2000
0.76%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


UWM and ULE have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UWM has higher volatility (14.29%) compared to ULE (2.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UWM dropped -88.21% vs ULE's -72.74%.

On 10-year performance, UWM leads with 12.82% vs -2.46% for ULE. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, ULE has been the lower-risk option at 2.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, UWM has performed better with a 12.82% return vs -2.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

UWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.76%, compared with 0.00% for ULE.

UWM is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while ULE is Leveraged Currency. UWM tracks Russell 2000 Index (200%), while ULE tracks USD/EUR Exchange Rate (-200%).

UWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.96 vs -0.17), 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 ULE

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