XPP vs. QTAP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and QTAP (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April) are both Leveraged Equities funds. XPP is passively managed, while QTAP is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XPP returned -22.11%/yr vs 12.65%/yr for QTAP. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QTAP.

Performance

XPP vs. QTAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -28.87% return, which is significantly lower than QTAP's 12.83% return.

XPP

• 1D: -3.49%
• 1M: -13.68%
• YTD: -28.87%
• 6M: -29.70%
• 1Y: -21.92%
• 3Y*: 3.54%
• 5Y*: -22.11%
• 10Y*: -6.09%

QTAP

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: -0.91%
• YTD: 12.83%
• 6M: 13.01%
• 1Y: 22.41%
• 3Y*: 19.78%
• 5Y*: 12.65%
• 10Y*: —

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

XPP vs. QTAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	-28.87%	45.84%	38.18%	-34.77%	-50.06%	-39.85%
QTAP Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April	12.83%	19.36%	17.34%	43.32%	-25.87%	15.95%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and QTAP is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.32
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2021	0.37

XPP vs. QTAP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XPP	QTAP
Financial Services	48.1%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.3%
Communication Services	-	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	8.7%
Energy	-	0.7%
Healthcare	-	5.1%
Industrials	-	3.3%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	50.7%
Utilities	-	1.6%

Return for Risk

XPP vs. QTAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

XPP

XPP Risk / Return Rank: 4
XPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Omega Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
XPP Martin Ratio Rank: 3

QTAP

QTAP Risk / Return Rank: 97
QTAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
QTAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
QTAP Omega Ratio Rank: 97
QTAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
QTAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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. QTAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP). 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	QTAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.56	3.70	-4.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.60	6.02	-6.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	1.94	-1.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.55	9.04	-9.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.23	52.85	-54.08

XPP vs. QTAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.56, which is lower than the QTAP Sharpe Ratio of 3.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP and QTAP, 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. QTAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than QTAP's maximum drawdown of -29.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and QTAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	XPP	QTAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.90%	-29.44%	-60.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.13%	-2.49%	-37.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-52.95%	-13.03%	-39.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-85.24%	-29.44%	-55.80%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-81.17%	-1.70%	-79.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.90%	-4.99%	-42.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.79%	0.43%	+17.36%

Volatility

XPP vs. QTAP - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.54% compared to Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) at 3.03%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QTAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XPP	QTAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.54%	3.03%	+9.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.54%	4.94%	+24.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.48%	6.12%	+33.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	62.84%	18.92%	+43.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	54.79%	18.72%	+36.07%

XPP vs. QTAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QTAP's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

XPP vs. QTAP - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.05%, while QTAP has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
QTAP Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	3.05%	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 QTAP in my portfolio?

XPP and QTAP have a correlation of 0.37, 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 QTAP?

XPP has higher volatility (12.54%) compared to QTAP (3.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs QTAP's -29.44%.

Which ETF is better, XPP or QTAP?

On 5-year performance, QTAP leads with 12.65% vs -22.11% for XPP. On fees, QTAP is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTAP has been the lower-risk option at 3.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XPP or QTAP?

Over the 5-year period, QTAP has performed better with a 12.65% return vs -22.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XPP or QTAP?

QTAP is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.

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

XPP has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.00% for QTAP.

What is the main difference between XPP and QTAP?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.79% for QTAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.70 vs -0.56), 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.