UWM vs. XPP

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

UWM (ProShares Ultra Russell2000) and XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) are both Leveraged Equities funds from ProShares - UWM tracks the Russell 2000 Index (200%) while XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UWM returned 11.84%/yr vs -5.67%/yr for XPP. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

UWM vs. XPP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UWM achieves a 28.31% return, which is significantly higher than XPP's -21.53% return. Over the past 10 years, UWM has outperformed XPP with an annualized return of 11.84%, while XPP has yielded a comparatively lower -5.67% annualized return.

UWM

• 1D: 1.69%
• 1M: -0.87%
• YTD: 28.31%
• 6M: 23.79%
• 1Y: 67.60%
• 3Y*: 22.44%
• 5Y*: 0.46%
• 10Y*: 11.84%

XPP

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -13.81%
• YTD: -21.53%
• 6M: -24.53%
• 1Y: -14.32%
• 3Y*: 4.28%
• 5Y*: -20.38%
• 10Y*: -5.67%

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

UWM vs. XPP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UWM ProShares Ultra Russell2000	28.31%	13.59%	11.32%	22.62%	-43.69%	23.91%	16.57%	48.62%	-25.89%	26.92%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	-21.53%	45.84%	38.18%	-34.77%	-50.06%	-40.45%	7.07%	24.88%	-31.36%	80.21%

Correlation

The correlation between UWM and XPP is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.38
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.40
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2009	0.52

The correlation between UWM and XPP shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (3 years) to 0.52 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

UWM vs. XPP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UWM	XPP
Industrials	17.7%	-
Technology	17.0%	-
Healthcare	16.5%	-
Financial Services	15.8%	43.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	-
Real Estate	6.1%	-
Energy	6.1%	-
Basic Materials	4.8%	-
Utilities	2.9%	-
Communication Services	2.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	-

Return for Risk

UWM vs. XPP — Risk / Return Rank

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

UWM

UWM Risk / Return Rank: 58
UWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
UWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
UWM Omega Ratio Rank: 49
UWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
UWM Martin Ratio Rank: 64

XPP

XPP Risk / Return Rank: 6
XPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
XPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
XPP Omega Ratio Rank: 6
XPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
XPP 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.

UWM vs. XPP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP). 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.

	UWM	XPP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	-0.37	+2.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.33	-0.28	+2.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	0.97	+0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.05	-0.42	+3.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.39	-0.88	+11.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UWM vs. XPP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is higher than the XPP Sharpe Ratio of -0.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UWM and XPP, 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

	UWM	XPP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.76	-0.37	+2.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.01	-0.33	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.26	-0.10	+0.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.14	-0.10	+0.24

Drawdowns

UWM vs. XPP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UWM drawdown since its inception was -88.21%, roughly equal to the maximum XPP drawdown of -89.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UWM and XPP.

Drawdown Indicators

	UWM	XPP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.21%	-89.90%	+1.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.28%	-33.95%	+11.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-49.79%	-52.95%	+3.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-61.62%	-85.24%	+23.62%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-71.46%	-89.90%	+18.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.15%	-79.23%	+73.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.87%	-47.84%	+16.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.52%	16.35%	-9.83%

Volatility

UWM vs. XPP - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Russell2000 (UWM) and ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) have volatilities of 13.04% and 13.71%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UWM	XPP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.04%	13.71%	-0.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.80%	29.06%	-1.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	38.72%	39.35%	-0.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	45.12%	62.77%	-17.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.14%	54.92%	-8.78%

UWM vs. XPP - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

UWM vs. XPP - Dividend Comparison

UWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, less than XPP's 2.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
UWM ProShares Ultra Russell2000	0.80%	1.05%	1.16%	0.34%	0.40%	0.00%	0.07%	0.55%	0.41%	0.11%	0.27%	0.23%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	2.76%	2.32%	2.96%	2.87%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.81%	1.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UWM and XPP in my portfolio?

UWM and XPP have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UWM or XPP?

XPP has higher volatility (13.71%) compared to UWM (13.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UWM dropped -88.21% vs XPP's -89.90%.

Which ETF is better, UWM or XPP?

On 10-year performance, UWM leads with 11.84% vs -5.67% for XPP. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, UWM has been the lower-risk option at 13.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UWM or XPP?

Over the 10-year period, UWM has performed better with a 11.84% return vs -5.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UWM or XPP?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UWM or XPP?

XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 0.80% for UWM.

What is the main difference between UWM and XPP?

UWM tracks Russell 2000 Index (200%), while XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs -0.37), 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.