XPP vs. MVLL
XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and MVLL (GraniteShares 2x Long MRVL Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds - XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%) while MVLL tracks the Marvell Technology Inc. (MRVL). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XPP returned -31.54% vs 598.83% for MVLL. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for MVLL.
Performance
XPP vs. MVLL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -34.24% return, which is significantly lower than MVLL's 621.98% return.
XPP
- 1D
- -4.68%
- 1M
- -21.13%
- YTD
- -34.24%
- 6M
- -35.23%
- 1Y
- -31.54%
- 3Y*
- 0.47%
- 5Y*
- -23.89%
- 10Y*
- -6.70%
MVLL
- 1D
- 3.74%
- 1M
- 48.86%
- YTD
- 621.98%
- 6M
- 595.95%
- 1Y
- 598.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XPP vs. MVLL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -34.24% | 1.85% |
MVLL GraniteShares 2x Long MRVL Daily ETF | 621.98% | -8.44% |
Correlation
The correlation between XPP and MVLL is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2025 | 0.37 |
XPP vs. MVLL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XPP
MVLL
Financial Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
XPP
MVLL
-
Basic Materials
XPP
-
MVLL
-
Communication Services
XPP
-
MVLL
-
Consumer Cyclical
XPP
-
MVLL
-
Consumer Defensive
XPP
-
MVLL
-
Energy
XPP
-
MVLL
-
Healthcare
XPP
-
MVLL
-
Industrials
XPP
-
MVLL
-
Real Estate
XPP
-
MVLL
-
Technology
XPP
-
MVLL
Utilities
XPP
-
MVLL
-
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. MVLL — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
MVLL
XPP vs. MVLL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and GraniteShares 2x Long MRVL Daily ETF (MVLL). 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 | MVLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.88 | 1.48 | -0.60 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.71 | 12.35 | -13.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.73 | 24.79 | -26.52 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XPP vs. MVLL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than MVLL's maximum drawdown of -59.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and MVLL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | MVLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -59.02% | -30.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.65% | -48.93% | +4.28% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.95% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -85.24% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -82.59% | -30.06% | -52.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.92% | -22.46% | -25.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.20% | 24.33% | -6.13% |
Volatility
XPP vs. MVLL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) is 13.07%, while GraniteShares 2x Long MRVL Daily ETF (MVLL) has a volatility of 86.62%. This indicates that XPP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MVLL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | MVLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.07% | 86.62% | -73.55% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.87% | 113.26% | -83.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.37% | 144.62% | -105.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.86% | 146.85% | -83.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.80% | 146.85% | -92.05% |
XPP vs. MVLL - Expense Ratio Comparison
XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than MVLL's 1.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
XPP vs. MVLL - Dividend Comparison
XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.18%, while MVLL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MVLL GraniteShares 2x Long MRVL Daily 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 | 3.18% | 2.32% | 2.96% | 2.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 3.81% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XPP and MVLL have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MVLL has higher volatility (86.62%) compared to XPP (13.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs MVLL's -59.02%.
On 1-year performance, MVLL leads with 598.83% vs -31.54% for XPP. On fees, XPP is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, XPP has been the lower-risk option at 13.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MVLL has performed better with a 598.83% return vs -31.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XPP is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MVLL.
XPP has the higher dividend yield at 3.18%, compared with 0.00% for MVLL.
XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while MVLL tracks Marvell Technology Inc. (MRVL). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 1.50% for MVLL.
MVLL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.18 vs -0.80), 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 MVLL
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