XPP vs. CRMG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and CRMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. XPP is passively managed, while CRMG is actively managed. Over the past year, XPP returned -21.92% vs -73.99% for CRMG. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CRMG.

Performance

XPP vs. CRMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -28.87% return, which is significantly higher than CRMG's -71.26% return.

XPP

• 1D: -3.49%
• 1M: -13.68%
• YTD: -28.87%
• 6M: -29.70%
• 1Y: -21.92%
• 3Y*: 3.54%
• 5Y*: -22.11%
• 10Y*: -6.09%

CRMG

• 1D: 4.23%
• 1M: -29.64%
• YTD: -71.26%
• 6M: -71.01%
• 1Y: -73.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XPP vs. CRMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	-28.87%	13.15%
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF	-71.26%	-0.29%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and CRMG is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025	0.14

Return for Risk

XPP vs. CRMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XPP

XPP Risk / Return Rank: 4
XPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Omega Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
XPP Martin Ratio Rank: 3

CRMG

CRMG Risk / Return Rank: 1
CRMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
CRMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
CRMG Omega Ratio Rank: 1
CRMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
CRMG Martin Ratio Rank: 0

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.

XPP vs. CRMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). 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	CRMG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.56	-0.97	+0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.60	-1.82	+1.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	0.79	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.55	-0.97	+0.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.23	-1.70	+0.47

XPP vs. CRMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.56, which is higher than the CRMG Sharpe Ratio of -0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP and CRMG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XPP vs. CRMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than CRMG's maximum drawdown of -79.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and CRMG.

Drawdown Indicators

	XPP	CRMG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.90%	-79.83%	-10.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.13%	-76.80%	+36.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-52.95%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-85.24%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-81.17%	-78.97%	-2.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.90%	-39.18%	-8.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.79%	43.41%	-25.62%

Volatility

XPP vs. CRMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) is 12.54%, while Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG) has a volatility of 32.53%. This indicates that XPP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CRMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XPP	CRMG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.54%	32.53%	-19.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.54%	63.74%	-34.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.48%	76.12%	-36.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	62.84%	75.39%	-12.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	54.79%	75.39%	-20.60%

XPP vs. CRMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CRMG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

XPP vs. CRMG - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.05%, while CRMG has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	3.05%	2.32%	2.96%	2.87%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.81%	1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XPP and CRMG in my portfolio?

XPP and CRMG have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XPP or CRMG?

CRMG has higher volatility (32.53%) compared to XPP (12.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs CRMG's -79.83%.

Which ETF is better, XPP or CRMG?

On 1-year performance, XPP leads with -21.92% vs -73.99% for CRMG. On fees, CRMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, XPP has been the lower-risk option at 12.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XPP or CRMG?

Over the 1-year period, XPP has performed better with a -21.92% return vs -73.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XPP or CRMG?

CRMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.

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

XPP has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.00% for CRMG.

What is the main difference between XPP and CRMG?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.75% for CRMG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XPP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.56 vs -0.97), 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.