XPP vs. KSTR
XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and KSTR (KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF) are both China Equities funds - XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%) while KSTR tracks the SSE Science and Technology Innovation Board 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XPP returned -14.42%/yr vs -2.88%/yr for KSTR. Their 0.46 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for KSTR.
Performance
XPP vs. KSTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -13.25% return, which is significantly lower than KSTR's 26.49% return.
XPP
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 29.99%
- 6M
- -18.24%
- YTD
- -13.25%
- 1Y
- -7.90%
- 3Y*
- 4.02%
- 5Y*
- -14.42%
- 10Y*
- -5.62%
- ALL TIME*
- -4.67%
KSTR
- 1D
- -1.30%
- 1M
- -16.50%
- 6M
- 12.10%
- YTD
- 26.49%
- 1Y
- 66.48%
- 3Y*
- 18.43%
- 5Y*
- -2.88%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -0.96%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $27.29M | $25.28M | $18.73M | |
| $97.64K | $74.04K | $132.37K |
XPP vs. KSTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -13.25% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -52.97% |
KSTR KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF | 26.49% | 42.82% | 6.12% | -17.93% | -38.51% | -2.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between XPP and KSTR is 0.39, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.49 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.45 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2021 | 0.46 |
The correlation between XPP and KSTR shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (1 year) to 0.49 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XPP vs. KSTR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XPP
KSTR
Financial Services
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
XPP
KSTR
-
Basic Materials
XPP
-
KSTR
Communication Services
XPP
-
KSTR
-
Consumer Cyclical
XPP
-
KSTR
Consumer Defensive
XPP
-
KSTR
-
Energy
XPP
-
KSTR
Healthcare
XPP
-
KSTR
Industrials
XPP
-
KSTR
Real Estate
XPP
-
KSTR
-
Technology
XPP
-
KSTR
Utilities
XPP
-
KSTR
-
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. KSTR — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
KSTR
XPP vs. KSTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR). 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 | KSTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.74 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 1.27 | -0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.24 | 2.38 | -2.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.50 | 7.25 | -7.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XPP vs. KSTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than KSTR's maximum drawdown of -66.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and KSTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | KSTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -66.46% | -23.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.78% | -27.23% | -17.55% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -48.56% | -41.55% | -7.01% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -81.38% | -65.99% | -15.39% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -77.04% | -27.23% | -49.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.11% | -37.98% | -10.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 21.55% | 8.93% | +12.62% |
Volatility
XPP vs. KSTR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) is 10.66%, while KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR) has a volatility of 21.43%. This indicates that XPP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KSTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | KSTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.66% | 21.43% | -10.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.57% | 36.10% | -6.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.39% | 43.94% | -3.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.33% | 39.83% | +22.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.80% | 38.86% | +15.94% |
XPP vs. KSTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than KSTR's 0.89% expense ratio.
Dividends
XPP vs. KSTR - Dividend Comparison
XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, while KSTR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KSTR KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index 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 | 2.41% | 2.32% | 2.96% | 2.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 3.81% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XPP and KSTR have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KSTR has higher volatility (21.43%) compared to XPP (10.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs KSTR's -66.46%.
On 5-year performance, KSTR leads with -2.88% vs -14.42% for XPP. On fees, KSTR is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, XPP has been the lower-risk option at 10.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, KSTR has performed better with a -2.88% return vs -14.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KSTR is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.
XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 0.00% for KSTR.
XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while KSTR tracks SSE Science and Technology Innovation Board 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.89% for KSTR.
KSTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs -0.27), 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 KSTR
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