XPP vs. SAA
XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and SAA (ProShares Ultra SmallCap600) are both exchange-traded funds - XPP is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while SAA is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XPP returned -6.62%/yr vs 11.73%/yr for SAA. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
XPP vs. SAA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -19.65% return, which is significantly lower than SAA's 40.69% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed SAA with an annualized return of -6.62%, while SAA has yielded a comparatively higher 11.73% annualized return.
XPP
- 1D
- 5.58%
- 1M
- 10.65%
- 6M
- -23.23%
- YTD
- -19.65%
- 1Y
- -20.13%
- 3Y*
- 6.19%
- 5Y*
- -18.36%
- 10Y*
- -6.62%
- ALL TIME*
- -5.11%
SAA
- 1D
- -1.26%
- 1M
- 2.42%
- 6M
- 23.30%
- YTD
- 40.69%
- 1Y
- 58.53%
- 3Y*
- 16.94%
- 5Y*
- 4.80%
- 10Y*
- 11.73%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.34%
XPP vs. SAA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -19.65% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -40.45% | 7.07% | 24.88% | -31.36% | 80.21% |
SAA ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 | 40.69% | 0.29% | 5.60% | 21.32% | -36.17% | 51.77% | -1.79% | 42.39% | -23.00% | 23.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between XPP and SAA is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2009 | 0.47 |
The correlation between XPP and SAA shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (1 year) to 0.47 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XPP vs. SAA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XPP
SAA
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
XPP
SAA
Basic Materials
XPP
-
SAA
Communication Services
XPP
-
SAA
Consumer Cyclical
XPP
-
SAA
Consumer Defensive
XPP
-
SAA
Energy
XPP
-
SAA
Healthcare
XPP
-
SAA
Industrials
XPP
-
SAA
Real Estate
XPP
-
SAA
Technology
XPP
-
SAA
Utilities
XPP
-
SAA
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. SAA — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
SAA
XPP vs. SAA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA). 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 | SAA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.89 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.28 | -0.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.45 | 3.23 | -3.68 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.97 | 10.51 | -11.48 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XPP vs. SAA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, roughly equal to the maximum SAA drawdown of -87.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and SAA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | SAA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -87.39% | -2.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.78% | -18.21% | -26.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.95% | -50.84% | -2.11% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -82.87% | -55.37% | -27.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | -74.54% | -15.36% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -78.74% | -4.54% | -74.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.04% | -27.26% | -20.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 20.77% | 5.59% | +15.18% |
Volatility
XPP vs. SAA - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.90% compared to ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 (SAA) at 7.48%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SAA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | SAA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.90% | 7.48% | +5.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.55% | 24.17% | +5.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.24% | 35.47% | +4.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.82% | 43.28% | +19.54% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.80% | 46.01% | +8.79% |
XPP vs. SAA - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both XPP and SAA have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
XPP vs. SAA - Dividend Comparison
XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.60%, more than SAA's 0.77% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SAA ProShares Ultra SmallCap600 | 0.77% | 1.05% | 1.36% | 0.88% | 0.46% | 0.00% | 0.03% | 0.35% | 0.27% | 0.00% | 0.14% |
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | 2.60% | 2.32% | 2.96% | 2.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 3.81% | 1.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XPP and SAA have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XPP has higher volatility (12.90%) compared to SAA (7.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs SAA's -87.39%.
On 10-year performance, SAA leads with 11.73% vs -6.62% for XPP. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, SAA has been the lower-risk option at 7.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, SAA has performed better with a 11.73% return vs -6.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XPP and SAA have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 0.77% for SAA.
XPP is categorized as China Equities, while SAA is Leveraged Equities. XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while SAA tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Index (200%).
SAA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs -0.50), 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 SAA
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