XPP vs. XBIL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and XBIL (US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XPP is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while XBIL is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XPP returned 3.54%/yr vs 4.60%/yr for XBIL. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. XPP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for XBIL.

Performance

XPP vs. XBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF (XBIL). 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 XBIL's 1.57% 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%

XBIL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.22%
• YTD: 1.57%
• 6M: 1.67%
• 1Y: 3.82%
• 3Y*: 4.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XPP vs. XBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	-28.87%	45.84%	38.18%	-37.33%
XBIL US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF	1.57%	4.17%	5.16%	4.28%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and XBIL is -0.10, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2023	-0.00

Return for Risk

XPP vs. XBIL — 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

XBIL

XBIL Risk / Return Rank: 100
XBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
XBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
XBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 99
XBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
XBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. XBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) and US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF (XBIL). 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	XBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.56	12.56	-13.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.60	38.47	-39.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	10.10	-9.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.55	64.01	-64.56
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.23	592.11	-593.35

XPP vs. XBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.56, which is lower than the XBIL Sharpe Ratio of 12.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP and XBIL, 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. XBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than XBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and XBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	XPP	XBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.90%	-0.08%	-89.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.13%	-0.06%	-40.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-52.95%	-0.07%	-52.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-85.24%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-81.17%	0.00%	-81.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.90%	-0.00%	-47.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.79%	0.01%	+17.78%

Volatility

XPP vs. XBIL - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 12.54% compared to US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF (XBIL) at 0.12%. This indicates that XPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XPP	XBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.54%	0.12%	+12.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.54%	0.19%	+29.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.48%	0.31%	+39.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	62.84%	0.38%	+62.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	54.79%	0.38%	+54.41%

XPP vs. XBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

XPP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than XBIL's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

XPP vs. XBIL - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.05%, less than XBIL's 3.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
XBIL US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF	3.76%	4.01%	4.90%	4.30%	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 XBIL in my portfolio?

XPP and XBIL have a correlation of -0.10, 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 XBIL?

XPP has higher volatility (12.54%) compared to XBIL (0.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs XBIL's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, XPP or XBIL?

On 3-year performance, XBIL leads with 4.60% vs 3.54% for XPP. On fees, XBIL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, XBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XPP or XBIL?

Over the 3-year period, XBIL has performed better with a 4.60% return vs 3.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XPP or XBIL?

XBIL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XPP.

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

XBIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.76%, compared with 3.05% for XPP.

What is the main difference between XPP and XBIL?

XPP is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while XBIL is Ultrashort Bond. XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while XBIL tracks ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and US Benchmark Series. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XPP and 0.15% for XBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (12.56 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.