XPP vs. CNYA
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 -7.40%/yr vs 5.28%/yr for CNYA. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.
Performance
XPP vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -26.96% return, which is significantly lower than CNYA's 3.41% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed CNYA with an annualized return of -7.40%, while CNYA has yielded a comparatively higher 5.28% annualized return.
XPP
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- -9.77%
- 6M
- -34.75%
- YTD
- -26.96%
- 1Y
- -21.29%
- 3Y*
- 1.14%
- 5Y*
- -20.34%
- 10Y*
- -7.40%
CNYA
- 1D
- -3.04%
- 1M
- -3.13%
- 6M
- -1.30%
- YTD
- 3.41%
- 1Y
- 24.47%
- 3Y*
- 9.03%
- 5Y*
- -1.52%
- 10Y*
- 5.28%
XPP vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -26.96% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -40.45% | 7.07% | 24.88% | -31.36% | 80.21% |
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 3.41% | 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 0.59, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 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 0.59 (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
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
XPP
CNYA
Basic Materials
XPP
-
CNYA
Communication Services
XPP
-
CNYA
Consumer Cyclical
XPP
-
CNYA
Consumer Defensive
XPP
-
CNYA
Energy
XPP
-
CNYA
Healthcare
XPP
-
CNYA
Industrials
XPP
-
CNYA
Real Estate
XPP
-
CNYA
Technology
XPP
-
CNYA
Utilities
XPP
-
CNYA
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
XPP vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
CNYA
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.
| XPP | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.80 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.23 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.48 | 3.16 | -3.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.06 | 8.38 | -9.44 |
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
| XPP | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -49.49% | -40.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.78% | -7.77% | -37.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.95% | -33.35% | -19.60% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -83.51% | -44.65% | -38.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | -49.49% | -40.41% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -80.67% | -18.08% | -62.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.01% | -20.62% | -27.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 20.17% | 2.93% | +17.24% |
Volatility
XPP vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.70% compared to iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) at 8.65%. 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
| XPP | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.70% | 8.65% | +4.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.45% | 14.98% | +14.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.94% | 19.41% | +20.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.76% | 24.02% | +38.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.77% | 23.59% | +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 2.86%, more than CNYA's 1.82% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 1.82% | 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 | 2.86% | 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 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XPP has higher volatility (12.70%) compared to CNYA (8.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs CNYA's -49.49%.
On 10-year performance, CNYA leads with 5.28% vs -7.40% for XPP. On fees, CNYA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, CNYA has been the lower-risk option at 8.65%. 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 5.28% return vs -7.40%. 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 2.86%, compared with 1.82% 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 (1.27 vs -0.54), 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.
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