XPP vs. URE
XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and URE (ProShares Ultra Real Estate) are both exchange-traded funds - XPP is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while URE is a REIT fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Real Estate Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XPP returned -5.00%/yr vs 3.72%/yr for URE. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
XPP vs. URE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -19.06% return, which is significantly lower than URE's 23.42% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed URE with an annualized return of -5.00%, while URE has yielded a comparatively higher 3.72% annualized return.
XPP
- 1D
- 2.14%
- 1M
- -15.80%
- YTD
- -19.06%
- 6M
- -20.73%
- 1Y
- -14.63%
- 3Y*
- 4.75%
- 5Y*
- -20.00%
- 10Y*
- -5.00%
URE
- 1D
- 1.83%
- 1M
- 4.44%
- YTD
- 23.42%
- 6M
- 23.42%
- 1Y
- 14.27%
- 3Y*
- 10.96%
- 5Y*
- -3.33%
- 10Y*
- 3.72%
XPP vs. URE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -19.06% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -40.45% | 7.07% | 24.88% | -31.36% | 80.21% |
URE ProShares Ultra Real Estate | 23.42% | -3.65% | 0.35% | 11.58% | -49.64% | 88.24% | -28.06% | 57.86% | -13.80% | 16.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between XPP and URE is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2009 | 0.38 |
The correlation between XPP and URE shifts across timeframes, from 0.22 (1 year) to 0.38 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XPP vs. URE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XPP
URE
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
XPP
URE
Basic Materials
XPP
-
URE
Communication Services
XPP
-
URE
-
Consumer Cyclical
XPP
-
URE
-
Consumer Defensive
XPP
-
URE
-
Energy
XPP
-
URE
-
Healthcare
XPP
-
URE
-
Industrials
XPP
-
URE
-
Real Estate
XPP
-
URE
Technology
XPP
-
URE
-
Utilities
XPP
-
URE
-
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. URE — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
URE
XPP vs. URE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and ProShares Ultra Real Estate (URE). 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 | URE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.90 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 1.11 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.43 | 0.87 | -1.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.87 | 2.09 | -2.96 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XPP vs. URE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, smaller than the maximum URE drawdown of -97.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and URE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | URE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -97.16% | +7.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -34.03% | -16.50% | -17.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.95% | -33.77% | -19.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -85.24% | -63.66% | -21.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | -70.49% | -19.41% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -78.58% | -48.75% | -29.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.86% | -64.49% | +16.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.88% | 6.83% | +10.05% |
Volatility
XPP vs. URE - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.76% compared to ProShares Ultra Real Estate (URE) at 9.54%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than URE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | URE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.76% | 9.54% | +3.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.73% | 20.35% | +8.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.23% | 27.52% | +11.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.75% | 37.38% | +25.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.86% | 40.58% | +14.28% |
XPP vs. URE - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both XPP and URE have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
XPP vs. URE - Dividend Comparison
XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.68%, more than URE's 1.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
URE ProShares Ultra Real Estate | 1.90% | 2.42% | 2.09% | 1.32% | 1.26% | 0.58% | 0.94% | 1.10% | 1.53% | 0.93% | 0.96% | 0.81% |
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | 2.68% | 2.32% | 2.96% | 2.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 3.81% | 1.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XPP and URE have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XPP has higher volatility (12.76%) compared to URE (9.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs URE's -97.16%.
On 10-year performance, URE leads with 3.72% vs -5.00% for XPP. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, URE has been the lower-risk option at 9.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, URE has performed better with a 3.72% return vs -5.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XPP and URE have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.68%, compared with 1.90% for URE.
XPP is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while URE is REIT. XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while URE tracks Dow Jones U.S. Real Estate Index (200%).
URE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.52 vs -0.37), 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 URE
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