XPP vs. UYG
XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and UYG (ProShares Ultra Financials) are both exchange-traded funds - XPP is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while UYG is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Financials Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XPP returned -7.40%/yr vs 18.05%/yr for UYG. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
XPP vs. UYG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -26.96% return, which is significantly lower than UYG's 1.79% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed UYG with an annualized return of -7.40%, while UYG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.05% annualized return.
XPP
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- -9.77%
- 6M
- -34.75%
- YTD
- -26.96%
- 1Y
- -21.29%
- 3Y*
- 1.14%
- 5Y*
- -20.34%
- 10Y*
- -7.40%
UYG
- 1D
- 1.11%
- 1M
- 10.46%
- 6M
- 0.44%
- YTD
- 1.79%
- 1Y
- 9.98%
- 3Y*
- 30.96%
- 5Y*
- 13.30%
- 10Y*
- 18.05%
XPP vs. UYG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -26.96% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -40.45% | 7.07% | 24.88% | -31.36% | 80.21% |
UYG ProShares Ultra Financials | 1.79% | 19.77% | 55.71% | 22.14% | -32.11% | 76.26% | -20.32% | 66.15% | -22.61% | 39.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between XPP and UYG is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.32 |
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 | 0.49 |
Over the past year, the correlation between XPP and UYG has dropped to 0.26 - well below their long-term average of 0.49, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
XPP vs. UYG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XPP
UYG
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
XPP
UYG
Basic Materials
XPP
-
UYG
-
Communication Services
XPP
-
UYG
-
Consumer Cyclical
XPP
-
UYG
-
Consumer Defensive
XPP
-
UYG
-
Energy
XPP
-
UYG
-
Healthcare
XPP
-
UYG
-
Industrials
XPP
-
UYG
Real Estate
XPP
-
UYG
-
Technology
XPP
-
UYG
Utilities
XPP
-
UYG
-
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. UYG — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
UYG
XPP vs. UYG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and ProShares Ultra Financials (UYG). 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 | UYG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.08 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.48 | 0.35 | -0.82 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.06 | 0.81 | -1.86 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XPP vs. UYG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, smaller than the maximum UYG drawdown of -97.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and UYG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | UYG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -97.90% | +8.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.78% | -28.91% | -15.87% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.95% | -30.35% | -22.60% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -83.51% | -47.77% | -35.74% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -89.90% | -69.98% | -19.92% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -80.67% | -3.86% | -76.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.01% | -63.07% | +15.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 20.17% | 12.39% | +7.78% |
Volatility
XPP vs. UYG - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.70% compared to ProShares Ultra Financials (UYG) at 8.44%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UYG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | UYG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.70% | 8.44% | +4.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.45% | 22.82% | +6.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.94% | 29.43% | +10.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.76% | 36.15% | +26.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.77% | 40.89% | +13.88% |
XPP vs. UYG - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both XPP and UYG have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
XPP vs. UYG - Dividend Comparison
XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, less than UYG's 11.47% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UYG ProShares Ultra Financials | 11.47% | 11.72% | 0.51% | 0.79% | 0.77% | 9.39% | 0.66% | 0.90% | 1.28% | 0.56% | 0.76% | 0.72% |
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | 2.86% | 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 UYG have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XPP has higher volatility (12.70%) compared to UYG (8.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs UYG's -97.90%.
On 10-year performance, UYG leads with 18.05% vs -7.40% for XPP. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, UYG has been the lower-risk option at 8.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, UYG has performed better with a 18.05% return vs -7.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XPP and UYG have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
UYG has the higher dividend yield at 11.47%, compared with 2.86% for XPP.
XPP is categorized as China Equities, while UYG is Leveraged Equities. XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while UYG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Financials Index (200%).
UYG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.34 vs -0.54), 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 UYG
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