XPP vs. IFED
XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and IFED (ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%) while IFED tracks the IFED Large-Cap US Equity Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XPP returned 7.34%/yr vs 16.71%/yr for IFED. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for IFED.
Performance
XPP vs. IFED - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -17.68% return, which is significantly lower than IFED's -3.52% return.
XPP
- 1D
- -4.83%
- 1M
- -6.40%
- YTD
- -17.68%
- 6M
- -20.01%
- 1Y
- -5.89%
- 3Y*
- 7.34%
- 5Y*
- -20.12%
- 10Y*
- -5.30%
IFED
- 1D
- -1.24%
- 1M
- 4.85%
- YTD
- -3.52%
- 6M
- -3.51%
- 1Y
- 1.97%
- 3Y*
- 16.71%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XPP vs. IFED - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -17.68% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -17.32% |
IFED ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN | -3.52% | 15.02% | 23.04% | 20.78% | -1.46% | 8.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between XPP and IFED is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2021 | 0.35 |
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. IFED — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
IFED
XPP vs. IFED - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN (IFED). 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.
| XPP | IFED | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.15 | 0.12 | -0.27 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.06 | 0.29 | -0.23 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.04 | -0.03 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 0.14 | -0.32 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.37 | 0.34 | -0.71 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XPP | IFED | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.15 | 0.12 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.32 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.10 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.09 | 0.65 | -0.74 |
Drawdowns
XPP vs. IFED - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than IFED's maximum drawdown of -22.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and IFED.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | IFED | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -22.36% | -67.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.60% | -14.65% | -17.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.95% | -22.36% | -30.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -85.24% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -78.21% | -5.50% | -72.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.82% | -5.84% | -41.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.95% | 5.75% | +10.20% |
Volatility
XPP vs. IFED - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 14.45% compared to ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN (IFED) at 4.50%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IFED based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | IFED | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.45% | 4.50% | +9.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.79% | 12.86% | +15.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.27% | 16.21% | +23.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.75% | 19.88% | +42.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.91% | 19.88% | +35.03% |
XPP vs. IFED - Expense Ratio Comparison
XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IFED's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
XPP vs. IFED - Dividend Comparison
XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.63%, while IFED has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IFED ETRACS IFED Invest with the Fed TR Index ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | 2.63% | 2.32% | 2.96% | 2.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 3.81% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XPP and IFED have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XPP has higher volatility (14.45%) compared to IFED (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs IFED's -22.36%.
On 3-year performance, IFED leads with 16.71% vs 7.34% for XPP. On fees, IFED is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, IFED has been the lower-risk option at 4.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, IFED has performed better with a 16.71% return vs 7.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IFED is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.
XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.63%, compared with 0.00% for IFED.
XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while IFED tracks IFED Large-Cap US Equity Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.45% for IFED.
IFED currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.12 vs -0.15), 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 IFED
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