XPP vs. KLIP

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and KLIP (KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XPP is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while KLIP is a Options Trading fund managed by CICC. Over the past 3 years, XPP returned 1.14%/yr vs 5.68%/yr for KLIP. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

XPP vs. KLIP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -26.96% return, which is significantly lower than KLIP's -9.76% 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%

KLIP

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: -0.89%
• 6M: -14.68%
• YTD: -9.76%
• 1Y: -5.38%
• 3Y*: 5.68%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XPP vs. KLIP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	-26.96%	45.84%	38.18%	-48.23%
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	-9.76%	16.92%	3.37%	11.11%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and KLIP is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2023	0.85

The correlation between XPP and KLIP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XPP vs. KLIP — Risk / Return Rank

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

XPP

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

KLIP

KLIP Risk / Return Rank: 6
KLIP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
KLIP Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
KLIP Omega Ratio Rank: 6
KLIP Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
KLIP Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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. KLIP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP). 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	KLIP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.54	-0.33	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.56	-0.34	-0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.94	0.96	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.48	-0.25	-0.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.06	-0.63	-0.43

XPP vs. KLIP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.54, which is lower than the KLIP Sharpe Ratio of -0.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP and KLIP, 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. KLIP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than KLIP's maximum drawdown of -21.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and KLIP.

Drawdown Indicators

	XPP	KLIP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.90%	-21.48%	-68.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-44.78%	-21.48%	-23.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-52.95%	-21.48%	-31.47%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-83.51%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-80.67%	-14.94%	-65.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.01%	-4.17%	-43.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	20.17%	8.59%	+11.58%

Volatility

XPP vs. KLIP - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.70% compared to KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF (KLIP) at 5.25%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KLIP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XPP	KLIP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.70%	5.25%	+7.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.45%	13.09%	+16.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.94%	16.58%	+23.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	62.76%	18.11%	+44.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	54.77%	18.11%	+36.66%

XPP vs. KLIP - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XPP and KLIP have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

XPP vs. KLIP - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, less than KLIP's 28.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
KLIP KraneShares China Internet and Covered Call Strategy ETF	28.55%	25.14%	54.26%	61.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	2.86%	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 KLIP in my portfolio?

XPP and KLIP have a correlation of 0.82, 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 KLIP?

XPP has higher volatility (12.70%) compared to KLIP (5.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs KLIP's -21.48%.

Which ETF is better, XPP or KLIP?

On 3-year performance, KLIP leads with 5.68% vs 1.14% for XPP. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, KLIP has been the lower-risk option at 5.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XPP or KLIP?

Over the 3-year period, KLIP has performed better with a 5.68% return vs 1.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XPP or KLIP?

XPP and KLIP have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

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

KLIP has the higher dividend yield at 28.55%, compared with 2.86% for XPP.

What is the main difference between XPP and KLIP?

XPP is categorized as China Equities, while KLIP is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and CICC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KLIP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.33 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.