PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XPP vs. CNYA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XPP vs. CNYA

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both China Equities funds - XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%) while CNYA tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XPP returned -5.62%/yr vs 5.37%/yr for CNYA. Their 0.69 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.

Performance

XPP vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -13.25% return, which is significantly lower than CNYA's 1.92% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed CNYA with an annualized return of -5.62%, while CNYA has yielded a comparatively higher 5.37% annualized return.

XPP

1D
-0.03%
1M
29.99%
6M
-18.24%
YTD
-13.25%
1Y
-7.90%
3Y*
4.02%
5Y*
-14.42%
10Y*
-5.62%
ALL TIME*
-4.67%

CNYA

1D
0.03%
1M
-4.04%
6M
0.38%
YTD
1.92%
1Y
21.02%
3Y*
7.65%
5Y*
-0.99%
10Y*
5.37%
ALL TIME*
5.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

CNYA

iShares MSCI China A ETF
$1.58M$2.45M$4.18M

XPP

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50
$97.64K$74.04K$132.37K

XPP vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XPP
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50		-13.25%45.84%38.18%-34.77%-50.06%-40.45%7.07%24.88%-31.36%80.21%
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.92%26.48%10.78%-13.76%-26.51%3.53%41.54%35.95%-26.56%30.99%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and CNYA is 0.55, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.55

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.65

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.68

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016

0.69

The correlation between XPP and CNYA shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.70 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XPP vs. CNYA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XPP
CNYA

Financial Services

48.4%
16.8%

Basic Materials

-

10.7%

Communication Services

-

1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

4.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

5.8%

Energy

-

2.6%

Healthcare

-

3.8%

Industrials

-

14.2%

Real Estate

-

0.5%

Technology

-

37.3%

Utilities

-

2.9%

Financial Services

XPP
48.4%
CNYA
16.8%

Basic Materials

XPP

-

CNYA
10.7%

Communication Services

XPP

-

CNYA
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

XPP

-

CNYA
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

XPP

-

CNYA
5.8%

Energy

XPP

-

CNYA
2.6%

Healthcare

XPP

-

CNYA
3.8%

Industrials

XPP

-

CNYA
14.2%

Real Estate

XPP

-

CNYA
0.5%

Technology

XPP

-

CNYA
37.3%

Utilities

XPP

-

CNYA
2.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50

iShares MSCI China A ETF

Often compared with XPP:
XPP vs. YINNXPP vs. KLIPXPP vs. EETXPP vs. QQQXPP vs. TSLLXPP vs. SSOXPP vs. VTI
Often compared with CNYA:
CNYA vs. MCHICNYA vs. ASHRCNYA vs. ICHN.ASCNYA vs. KBACNYA vs. FLCHCNYA vs. ICGA.DECNYA vs. GXC

Return for Risk

XPP vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
XPP
XPP Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
XPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
XPP Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
XPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
XPP Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank
CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XPP vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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.

XPPCNYADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.27
1.03

-1.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
-0.12
1.51

-1.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.99

1.19

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.24

2.00

-2.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.50

5.87

-6.37

XPP vs. CNYA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.27, which is lower than the CNYA Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP and CNYA, 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

XPP vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than CNYA's maximum drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and CNYA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XPPCNYADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.90%

-49.49%

-40.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-44.78%

-10.37%

-34.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-48.56%

-33.35%

-15.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-81.38%

-44.65%

-36.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-89.90%

-49.49%

-40.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-77.04%

-19.26%

-57.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-48.11%

-20.61%

-27.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

21.55%

3.53%

+18.02%

Volatility

XPP vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 10.66% compared to iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) at 8.72%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XPPCNYADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.66%

8.72%

+1.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

29.57%

15.98%

+13.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

40.39%

20.27%

+20.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

62.33%

23.87%

+38.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

54.80%

23.62%

+31.18%

XPP vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison

XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

XPP vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, more than CNYA's 1.84% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.84%1.92%2.51%4.23%2.69%1.11%1.06%1.21%3.92%0.97%1.38%
XPP
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50		2.41%2.32%2.96%2.87%0.00%0.00%0.00%3.81%1.47%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

XPP and CNYA have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XPP has higher volatility (10.66%) compared to CNYA (8.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs CNYA's -49.49%.

On 10-year performance, CNYA leads with 5.37% vs -5.62% for XPP. On fees, CNYA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, CNYA has been the lower-risk option at 8.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CNYA has performed better with a 5.37% return vs -5.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CNYA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.

XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 1.84% for CNYA.

XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.60% for CNYA.

CNYA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.03 vs -0.27), 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 XPP and CNYA

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