UCO vs VTI
ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. UCO delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | UCO | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.95% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $418M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 9 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +135.03% | +12.65% | |
| 1Y Return | +99.16% | +21.39% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.66% | +21.54% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +25.12% | +12.11% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 65.2% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -100.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 24, 2008 | May 24, 2001 |
UCO vs VTI Performance
ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) is a ETF from ProShares and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year UCO returned +99.16% while VTI returned +21.39%. Year to date, UCO is up 135.03% versus a gain of 12.65% for VTI.
Over three years, UCO compounded at +14.66% per year against +21.54% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +25.12% and +12.11% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.07% annualized vs -23.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
UCO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 65.2% compared with 15.3% for VTI. 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 -100.0% for UCO and -56.6% for VTI. 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
UCO charges 0.95% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $95 vs $3 annually, a gap of $92 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, UCO currently yields 0.00% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
UCO and VTI share 0 holdings out of 2788 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, UCO or VTI?
UCO has an expense ratio of 0.95% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $92 per year of difference.
Which performed better, UCO or VTI?
Over the past year UCO returned +99.16% vs +21.39% for VTI, so UCO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), UCO annualized -23.66% vs +8.07% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, UCO or VTI?
UCO has been the more volatile fund at 65.2% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: UCO -100.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both UCO and VTI?
UCO and VTI 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 UCO and VTI?
UCO and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2788 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, UCO or VTI?
UCO yields 0.00% while VTI yields 1.07%, so VTI 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.