IVV vs UCO
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. UCO delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | UCO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.95% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $416M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 9 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | +92.01% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.70% | +63.28% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.49% | +5.75% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.43% | +16.78% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 65.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -100.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | ProShares | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 24, 2008 |
IVV vs UCO Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) is a ETF from ProShares. Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% while UCO returned +63.28%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a gain of 92.01% for UCO.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.49% per year against +5.75% for UCO; over five years the annualized figures are +13.43% and +16.78% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.05% annualized vs -24.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
UCO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 65.1% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -56.5% for IVV and -100.0% for UCO. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.37. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while UCO charges 0.95%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $95 annually, a gap of $92 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.00% for UCO.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and UCO share 0 holdings out of 506 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or UCO?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while UCO charges 0.95%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $92 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or UCO?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% vs +63.28% for UCO, so UCO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), IVV annualized +7.05% vs -24.57% for UCO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or UCO?
UCO has been the more volatile fund at 65.1% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs UCO -100.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and UCO?
IVV and UCO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.37, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and UCO?
IVV and UCO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or UCO?
IVV yields 1.09% while UCO yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.