PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XSVM vs. UCO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XSVM vs. UCO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XSVM (Invesco S&P SmallCap Value with Momentum ETF) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both exchange-traded funds - XSVM is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 High Momentum Value Index, while UCO is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XSVM returned 12.70%/yr vs -11.98%/yr for UCO. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XSVM charges 0.37%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.

Performance

XSVM vs. UCO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap Value with Momentum ETF (XSVM) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XSVM achieves a 18.52% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 139.34% return. Over the past 10 years, XSVM has outperformed UCO with an annualized return of 12.70%, while UCO has yielded a comparatively lower -11.98% annualized return.

XSVM

1D
1.41%
1M
1.89%
YTD
18.52%
6M
18.72%
1Y
37.81%
3Y*
17.43%
5Y*
6.67%
10Y*
12.70%

UCO

1D
-3.93%
1M
-5.57%
YTD
139.34%
6M
124.58%
1Y
115.57%
3Y*
24.38%
5Y*
21.18%
10Y*
-11.98%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XSVM vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XSVM
Invesco S&P SmallCap Value with Momentum ETF		18.52%7.47%2.30%20.20%-13.63%56.36%5.08%30.01%-12.33%3.62%
UCO
ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil		139.34%-29.75%5.36%-13.89%39.71%139.26%-92.91%53.83%-43.26%0.34%

Correlation

The correlation between XSVM and UCO is -0.25, 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

-0.25

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.05

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 26, 2008

0.34

The correlation between XSVM and UCO shifts across timeframes, from -0.25 (1 year) to 0.34 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco S&P SmallCap Value with Momentum ETF

ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil

Often compared with XSVM:
XSVM vs. XSMOXSVM vs. AVUVXSVM vs. RWJXSVM vs. XSHQXSVM vs. SPHBXSVM vs. DGRSXSVM vs. RYPRX
Often compared with UCO:
UCO vs. USOUCO vs. SCOUCO vs. OILUUCO vs. BOILUCO vs. ERXUCO vs. LABUUCO vs. OIH

Return for Risk

XSVM vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XSVM
XSVM Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
XSVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XSVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
XSVM Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
XSVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
XSVM Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
UCO
UCO Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
UCO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UCO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
UCO Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
UCO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
UCO Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XSVM vs. UCO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap Value with Momentum ETF (XSVM) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). 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.

XSVMUCODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.05
2.03

+0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.94
2.39

+0.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.31

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.77

3.34

+0.43

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.60

6.32

+5.28

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XSVM vs. UCO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XSVM Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the UCO Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XSVM and UCO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XSVMUCODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.05

2.03

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

0.36

-0.06

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.51

-0.17

+0.68

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

-0.34

+0.71

Drawdowns

XSVM vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XSVM drawdown since its inception was -62.57%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XSVM and UCO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XSVMUCODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.57%

-99.95%

+37.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.08%

-34.77%

+24.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.21%

-50.38%

+24.17%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.21%

-67.24%

+41.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.02%

-98.75%

+49.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.07%

-99.26%

+99.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.56%

-85.49%

+73.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.27%

18.34%

-15.07%

Volatility

XSVM vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap Value with Momentum ETF (XSVM) is 5.29%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 20.99%. This indicates that XSVM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UCO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XSVMUCODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.29%

20.99%

-15.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.11%

46.57%

-34.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.60%

57.26%

-38.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.72%

59.81%

-37.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.09%

71.35%

-46.26%

XSVM vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XSVM has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

XSVM vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison

XSVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%, while UCO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
UCO
ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XSVM
Invesco S&P SmallCap Value with Momentum ETF		1.79%2.29%1.69%1.31%1.79%1.23%1.21%1.22%2.54%1.90%2.29%2.68%

Frequently Asked Questions

XSVM and UCO have a correlation of -0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UCO has higher volatility (20.99%) compared to XSVM (5.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XSVM dropped -62.57% vs UCO's -99.95%.

On 10-year performance, XSVM leads with 12.70% vs -11.98% for UCO. On fees, XSVM is cheaper at 0.37% per year. On volatility, XSVM has been the lower-risk option at 5.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XSVM has performed better with a 12.70% return vs -11.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XSVM is cheaper with a 0.37% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.

XSVM has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 0.00% for UCO.

XSVM is categorized as Momentum, while UCO is Leveraged Commodities. XSVM tracks S&P SmallCap 600 High Momentum Value Index, while UCO tracks Dow Jones-UBS Crude Oil Sub-Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for XSVM and 0.95% for UCO.

XSVM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 2.03), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XSVM and UCO

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