PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

XPP vs. ECNS

Last updated Jul 18, 2026
Documentation

XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and ECNS (iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF) are both China Equities funds - XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%) while ECNS tracks the MSCI China Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XPP returned -6.82%/yr vs 0.83%/yr for ECNS. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ECNS.

Performance

XPP vs. ECNS - 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 Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). 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 -23.90% return, which is significantly lower than ECNS's -12.63% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed ECNS with an annualized return of -6.82%, while ECNS has yielded a comparatively higher 0.83% annualized return.

XPP

1D
-2.23%
1M
2.02%
6M
-27.28%
YTD
-23.90%
1Y
-22.55%
3Y*
4.55%
5Y*
-19.72%
10Y*
-6.82%

ECNS

1D
-2.83%
1M
-5.08%
6M
-17.82%
YTD
-12.63%
1Y
-13.15%
3Y*
4.29%
5Y*
-8.38%
10Y*
0.83%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XPP vs. ECNS - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XPP
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50		-23.90%45.84%38.18%-34.77%-50.06%-40.45%7.07%24.88%-31.36%80.21%
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF		-12.63%36.49%5.64%-23.05%-24.58%2.11%25.42%7.84%-18.27%27.55%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and ECNS is 0.71, 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

0.71

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

0.80

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

0.83

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

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2010

0.75

The correlation between XPP and ECNS shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.83 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XPP vs. ECNS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XPP
ECNS

Financial Services

50.6%
5.3%

Basic Materials

-

8.9%

Communication Services

-

6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

7.5%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.1%

Energy

-

2.4%

Healthcare

-

20.5%

Industrials

-

21.9%

Real Estate

-

7.8%

Technology

-

11.6%

Utilities

-

1.5%

Financial Services

XPP
50.6%
ECNS
5.3%

Basic Materials

XPP

-

ECNS
8.9%

Communication Services

XPP

-

ECNS
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

XPP

-

ECNS
7.5%

Consumer Defensive

XPP

-

ECNS
4.1%

Energy

XPP

-

ECNS
2.4%

Healthcare

XPP

-

ECNS
20.5%

Industrials

XPP

-

ECNS
21.9%

Real Estate

XPP

-

ECNS
7.8%

Technology

XPP

-

ECNS
11.6%

Utilities

XPP

-

ECNS
1.5%

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 Small-Cap ETF

Often compared with XPP:
XPP vs. YINNXPP vs. KLIPXPP vs. EETXPP vs. QQQXPP vs. TSLLXPP vs. SSOXPP vs. VTI
Often compared with ECNS:
ECNS vs. ASHSECNS vs. MCHIECNS vs. CNXTECNS vs. DFAEECNS vs. CQQQECNS vs. FLCHECNS vs. EWT

Return for Risk

XPP vs. ECNS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XPP
XPP Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
XPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
XPP Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
XPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
XPP Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank
ECNS
ECNS Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
ECNS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECNS Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECNS Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
ECNS Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECNS Martin Ratio Rank: 44
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.

XPP vs. ECNS - 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 Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). 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.

XPPECNSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.57
-0.63

+0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
-0.62
-0.74

+0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.93

0.91

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.51

-0.51

+0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.09

-1.10

0.00

XPP vs. ECNS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.57, which is comparable to the ECNS Sharpe Ratio of -0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP and ECNS, 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. ECNS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than ECNS's maximum drawdown of -63.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and ECNS.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XPPECNSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.90%

-63.43%

-26.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-44.78%

-25.73%

-19.05%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-52.95%

-31.72%

-21.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-82.87%

-57.79%

-25.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-89.90%

-63.43%

-26.47%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-79.86%

-43.76%

-36.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-48.04%

-29.47%

-18.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

20.67%

12.03%

+8.64%

Volatility

XPP vs. ECNS - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.96% compared to iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) at 6.76%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECNS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XPPECNSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.96%

6.76%

+6.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

29.00%

14.26%

+14.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

39.84%

21.10%

+18.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

62.76%

29.50%

+33.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

54.76%

25.81%

+28.95%

XPP vs. ECNS - Expense Ratio Comparison

XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than ECNS's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

XPP vs. ECNS - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.75%, less than ECNS's 6.73% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECNS
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF		6.73%6.20%5.98%4.89%3.54%4.87%3.59%3.23%6.16%3.18%4.29%3.58%
XPP
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50		2.75%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

XPP and ECNS have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XPP has higher volatility (12.96%) compared to ECNS (6.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs ECNS's -63.43%.

On 10-year performance, ECNS leads with 0.83% vs -6.82% for XPP. On fees, ECNS is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ECNS has been the lower-risk option at 6.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ECNS has performed better with a 0.83% return vs -6.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ECNS is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.

ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.73%, compared with 2.75% for XPP.

XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while ECNS tracks MSCI China Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.59% for ECNS.

XPP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.57 vs -0.63), 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 ECNS

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