XPP vs. ISVBF
XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XPP is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while ISVBF is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XPP returned -20.12%/yr vs -5.16%/yr for ISVBF. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
XPP vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -17.68% return, which is significantly lower than ISVBF's -6.46% 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%
ISVBF
- 1D
- -2.03%
- 1M
- -2.58%
- YTD
- -6.46%
- 6M
- -7.93%
- 1Y
- 7.29%
- 3Y*
- 9.94%
- 5Y*
- -5.16%
- 10Y*
- —
XPP vs. ISVBF - 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% | -37.32% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -6.46% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between XPP and ISVBF is 0.68, 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 | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2021 | 0.34 |
Over the past year, XPP and ISVBF have become more correlated (0.68) than their long-term average of 0.34, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
ISVBF
XPP vs. ISVBF - 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 UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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 | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.07 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 0.38 | -0.56 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.37 | 0.89 | -1.26 |
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 | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.15 | 0.24 | -0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.32 | -0.17 | -0.15 |
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 | -0.15 | +0.06 |
Drawdowns
XPP vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than ISVBF's maximum drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and ISVBF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -53.78% | -36.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.60% | -19.18% | -13.42% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.95% | -23.77% | -29.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -85.24% | -53.22% | -32.02% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -78.21% | -24.18% | -54.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.82% | -32.76% | -15.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.95% | 8.21% | +7.74% |
Volatility
XPP vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 14.45% compared to iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) at 10.81%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.45% | 10.81% | +3.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.79% | 26.55% | +2.24% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.27% | 30.57% | +8.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.75% | 30.20% | +32.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.91% | 30.21% | +24.70% |
XPP vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
XPP vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison
XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.63%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS 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 | 2.63% | 2.32% | 2.96% | 2.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 3.81% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XPP and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.68, 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 ISVBF (10.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.
On 5-year performance, ISVBF leads with -5.16% vs -20.12% for XPP. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 10.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ISVBF has performed better with a -5.16% return vs -20.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.
XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.63%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
XPP is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while ISVBF is China Equities. XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.40% for ISVBF.
ISVBF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.24 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 ISVBF
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