PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XPP vs. KBA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XPP vs. KBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). 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 -26.96% return, which is significantly lower than KBA's 6.54% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed KBA with an annualized return of -7.40%, while KBA has yielded a comparatively higher 9.13% 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%

KBA

1D
-1.26%
1M
-2.80%
6M
3.29%
YTD
6.54%
1Y
34.92%
3Y*
13.52%
5Y*
5.89%
10Y*
9.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XPP vs. KBA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
KBA
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
6.54%33.88%15.73%-16.77%-3.49%3.17%41.62%35.44%-26.28%30.69%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and KBA 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

0.69

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

0.71

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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2014

0.70

The correlation between XPP and KBA shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.73 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XPP vs. KBA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XPP
KBA

Financial Services

50.6%
17.4%

Basic Materials

-

9.3%

Communication Services

-

1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

-

5.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.5%

Energy

-

3.0%

Healthcare

-

3.7%

Industrials

-

15.4%

Real Estate

-

0.5%

Technology

-

34.1%

Utilities

-

3.2%

Financial Services

XPP
50.6%
KBA
17.4%

Basic Materials

XPP

-

KBA
9.3%

Communication Services

XPP

-

KBA
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XPP

-

KBA
5.4%

Consumer Defensive

XPP

-

KBA
6.5%

Energy

XPP

-

KBA
3.0%

Healthcare

XPP

-

KBA
3.7%

Industrials

XPP

-

KBA
15.4%

Real Estate

XPP

-

KBA
0.5%

Technology

XPP

-

KBA
34.1%

Utilities

XPP

-

KBA
3.2%

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. KBA — 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

KBA
KBA Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
KBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
KBA Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
KBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
KBA Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
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. KBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA). 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.


XPPKBADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.98

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.94

1.31

-0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.48

4.58

-5.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.06

10.82

-11.88

XPP vs. KBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.54, which is lower than the KBA Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP and KBA, 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. KBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than KBA's maximum drawdown of -53.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and KBA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XPPKBADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.90%

-53.24%

-36.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-44.78%

-7.65%

-37.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-52.95%

-31.23%

-21.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-83.51%

-39.76%

-43.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-89.90%

-45.32%

-44.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-80.67%

-7.01%

-73.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-48.01%

-25.62%

-22.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

20.17%

3.23%

+16.94%

Volatility

XPP vs. KBA - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.70% compared to KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF (KBA) at 9.07%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KBA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XPPKBADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.70%

9.07%

+3.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

29.45%

15.47%

+13.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

39.94%

20.01%

+19.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

62.76%

27.44%

+35.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

54.77%

25.44%

+29.33%

XPP vs. KBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than KBA's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

XPP vs. KBA - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, more than KBA's 1.47% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
KBA
KraneShares Bosera MSCI China A Share ETF
1.47%1.56%2.18%2.34%49.05%9.07%0.65%1.53%3.77%1.46%6.62%29.08%
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%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


XPP and KBA 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 KBA (9.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs KBA's -53.24%.

On 10-year performance, KBA leads with 9.13% vs -7.40% for XPP. On fees, KBA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, KBA has been the lower-risk option at 9.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, KBA has performed better with a 9.13% return vs -7.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

KBA 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 1.47% for KBA.

XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while KBA tracks MSCI China A Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.60% for KBA.

KBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XPP and KBA

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