XPP vs. KURE
XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and KURE (KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF) are both China Equities funds - XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%) while KURE tracks the MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XPP returned -14.42%/yr vs -12.04%/yr for KURE. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for KURE.
Performance
XPP vs. KURE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -13.25% return, which is significantly lower than KURE's 1.41% 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%
KURE
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 5.01%
- 6M
- -2.43%
- YTD
- 1.41%
- 1Y
- -7.37%
- 3Y*
- -0.53%
- 5Y*
- -12.04%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -1.87%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $507.63K | $1.60M | $845.13K | |
| $97.64K | $74.04K | $132.37K |
XPP vs. KURE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -13.25% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -40.45% | 7.07% | 24.88% | -46.93% |
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | 1.41% | 24.87% | -17.83% | -17.70% | -25.43% | -16.01% | 68.97% | 34.30% | -30.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between XPP and KURE is 0.54, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.54 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.60 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.63 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2018 | 0.62 |
The correlation between XPP and KURE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.
XPP vs. KURE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XPP
KURE
Financial Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
XPP
KURE
-
Basic Materials
XPP
-
KURE
-
Communication Services
XPP
-
KURE
-
Consumer Cyclical
XPP
-
KURE
-
Consumer Defensive
XPP
-
KURE
Energy
XPP
-
KURE
-
Healthcare
XPP
-
KURE
Industrials
XPP
-
KURE
-
Real Estate
XPP
-
KURE
-
Technology
XPP
-
KURE
-
Utilities
XPP
-
KURE
-
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. KURE — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
KURE
XPP vs. KURE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE). 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 | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.03 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 0.97 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.24 | -0.27 | +0.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.50 | -0.52 | +0.01 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XPP vs. KURE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than KURE's maximum drawdown of -68.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and KURE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -68.53% | -21.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.78% | -30.88% | -13.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -48.56% | -34.05% | -14.51% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -81.38% | -63.97% | -17.41% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -77.04% | -55.84% | -21.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.11% | -38.43% | -9.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 21.55% | 16.07% | +5.48% |
Volatility
XPP vs. KURE - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) have volatilities of 10.66% and 10.91%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | KURE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.66% | 10.91% | -0.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.57% | 20.85% | +8.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.39% | 28.26% | +12.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.33% | 31.46% | +30.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.80% | 32.44% | +22.36% |
XPP vs. KURE - Expense Ratio Comparison
XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than KURE's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
XPP vs. KURE - Dividend Comparison
XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, less than KURE's 4.14% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KURE KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF | 4.14% | 4.19% | 1.29% | 0.65% | 0.05% | 14.12% | 0.00% | 0.25% | 0.21% |
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 KURE have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KURE has higher volatility (10.91%) compared to XPP (10.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs KURE's -68.53%.
On 5-year performance, KURE leads with -12.04% vs -14.42% for XPP. On fees, KURE is cheaper at 0.65% 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, KURE has performed better with a -12.04% return vs -14.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
KURE is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.
KURE has the higher dividend yield at 4.14%, compared with 2.41% for XPP.
XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while KURE tracks MSCI China All Shares Health Care 10/40 Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.65% for KURE.
XPP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.27 vs -0.30), 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 KURE
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