© 2026 Sparkline Capital LP. All rights reserved.

For informational purposes only. Not investment advice or a recommendation of any security or fund. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Disclosures | Methodology |

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

Selection

Selected (1/4)

UCC

Seeded with the selected fund at 100%

Benchmark

Pick one fund or composite — returns and exposures render in excess of it

Peer Universe

Reference set for percentile ranks and factor bars

Leveraged Funds · 749 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

UCC

LeveragedSector

ProShares Ultra Consumer Discretionary

Expense Ratio
0.95%
AUM
$8M
Inception
2/2/2007
1Y Return
-17.7%37th %ilevs 749 asset-class peers
·

The index is designed to measure the performance of consumer discretionary companies included in the S&P 500 Index. Under normal circumstances, the fund will obtain leveraged exposure to at least 80% of its total assets in components of the index or in instruments with similar economic characteristics. The fund is non-diversified.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
UCC
ProShares Ultra Consumer Discretionary
-17.7%-17.7%39.0%-0.55-29.1%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Drag on chart to select period. Sharpe Ratio uses the one-month T-bill as the risk-free rate. From 10/7/2025 to 10/7/2026.

Trailing Returns

Name
YTD1D5D1M3M6M1Y2Y3Y5YMAX
UCC
ProShares Ultra Consumer Discretionary
-18.4%-0.7%4.5%-6.4%-11.8%2.7%-17.7%3.9%13.4%-3.3%11.3%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized. As of 10/7/2026.

Annual Returns

Name
2007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
UCC
ProShares Ultra Consumer Discretionary
-18.6%*-57.0%64.7%52.4%15.2%48.6%79.8%34.7%-1.0%-4.9%32.2%-19.2%53.8%46.5%21.7%-57.9%61.7%44.2%2.2%-18.4%
ⓘ Methodology

* partial year — the series ran for only part of it (its first year, or the year it closed); the figure is the return over the part it did run. ETF performance based on market prices. As of 10/7/2026.

Correlation Matrix

Benchmark

Select a second series, or to correlate with the seven research factors.

Factor Regression

Name
Ann. αβ MKTβ SMBβ HMLβ RMWβ CMAβ UMDβ iHMLR²Obs
UCCUS
ProShares Ultra Consumer Discretionary
-38.4%2.57**0.45*-0.060.38-0.16-0.33**0.180.70226
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. US factor set. Daily OLS of excess return (fund − T-bill) on factor spread returns over the selected date range, intersected with each series' history. Bold with * |t| ≥ 1.96, ** |t| ≥ 2.58. Cell shading tracks each loading's t-stat. Betas are returns-based — compare with the holdings-based factor scores below. Factor returns are long-short spread returns (© Ken French, Dartmouth). From 10/7/2025 to 8/31/2026.

SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund ProfileLeveragedSector

Fund Documents(opens the fund company’s site in a new tab)
Family
Registrant
Type
ETF
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Leveraged
Region
Equity Size & Style
Prospectus Benchmark
S&P Consumer Discretionary Select Sector Index
Peer Group
Leveraged - Equity (703 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
37
3Y Peer Percentile
31
Expense Ratio
0.95%
AUM
$8M
3Y Flow
-74.1%
Yield
1.53%
Inception
2/2/2007
Holdings (Reported)
56
Turnover
5%
Equity
68%
Derivatives
-33%
Net Equity Exposure
200%
Strategy Summary

The index is designed to measure the performance of consumer discretionary companies included in the S&P 500 Index. Under normal circumstances, the fund will obtain leveraged exposure to at least 80% of its total assets in components of the index or in instruments with similar economic characteristics. The fund is non-diversified.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the SEC annual shareholder report (8/6/2026). Turnover from the SEC annual report (8/6/2026). Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 9/30/2026. Holdings, asset class, style, peer group and exposures as of 5/31/2026. Summary may be from an older prospectus.

Equity Size & Style Map

Based on equity exposure only (65% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
2%
47%
34%
6%
6%
5%
1%
1%
-
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
82%
Mid
17%
Small
1%
Style
Value
8%
Core
53%
Growth
38%
ⓘ Methodology

Equity size and style definitions: Large vs. Small based on market cap, where Large > $70B, Mid $10-70B, and Small < $10B. Value vs. Growth based on percentile ranking on Traditional Value score within the fund's region and size cohort (equal thirds among its true equity-fund peers). Cell shading and percentages: share of classified holdings weight per box, from stock-level classification (size on the same $70B/$10B lines; value by Traditional Value terciles across scored stocks). The dot is the average holding ranked against other funds, so dot and weights can differ at the margin. The Size and Style bars are the grid's row and column totals. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Composite FactorsRef: Leveraged Funds

Based on equity exposure only (65% of total assets).

Intangible Value86.2
Traditional Value25.9
Small-Cap23.3
Quality28.1
Momentum11.7
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Ranked within the clean equity fund universe, one entry per fund series (lowest: 0, highest: 100; the middle of the range is denser than the ends). Blue dots mark the fund; the shaded band spans the Leveraged Funds class 25th–75th percentile of scores, notched at the median. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Leveraged Funds

Based on equity exposure only (65% of total assets).

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)13.5
Sales-to-Price (NTM)40.6
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)4.2
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap2.7
Patents / Mkt Cap0.72
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap2.2
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.10
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap2.4
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap12.4
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap15.1
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap1.2
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Solid blue dots mark the fund's position within the clean equity fund universe (5th–95th percentile scale); the shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Leveraged Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026. Expense ratio, yield, and turnover as of 10/6/2026. AUM as of 9/30/2026.

Country Exposure

Level

Based on holdings that carry a country (61% of total assets).

98.5%
98.5%
1.5%
1.2%
Other0.3%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the holdings that carry a country, not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level

Based on equity exposure only (65% of total assets).

99.1%
0.9%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified holdings — every position we can identify, with cash and unidentified positions excluded — not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

Based on equity exposure only (65% of total assets).

AI Composition

Infrastructure47.7%
Early Adopter18.7%
Laggard33.6%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 747.7%
Non-Magnificent 752.3%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy64.2%
New Economy35.8%

Globalization

Multinational37.2%
Exporter29.2%
Importer21.2%
Domestic12.4%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled0.0%
Revenue & Operations20.7%
Operations Only10.0%
Revenue Only0.4%
No Material Exposure68.9%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)47.7%
Large ($70–500B)33.7%
Mid ($10–70B)17.8%
Small ($1–10B)0.8%
Micro (<$1B)0.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 68% of net assets) — they are not portfolio weights. China exposure: domiciled = incorporated in China or Hong Kong, falling back to the filing's country for holdings outside the stock model. Among the rest, revenue = ≥15% of revenue derived from China; operations = ≥3% of LinkedIn-tracked workforce in China, or ≥2 identified Chinese suppliers making up ≥12% of those identified. China revenue is estimated where segment reporting is absent. Company size bands by holding market cap: Mega >$500B, Large $70–500B, Mid $10–70B, Small $1–10B, Micro <$1B. Old vs New Economy partitions Sparkline's 48 industries: New = technology, internet platforms and entertainment, e-commerce, payments, pharma/biotech/medtech, and renewable energy; Old = everything else. Shares are of classified holdings and sum to 100%. China shares are of total equity weight. Size shares are of scored holdings weight. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

56 positions (top 10 shown, create for full holdings)

#NameTickerWeight %SectorIndustryCountry
1Amazon.comAMZN
17.87
Consumer DiscE-CommerceUSA
2TeslaTSLA
12.99
Consumer DiscAutomobilesUSA
3Repurchase Agreement-
8.23
--USA
4Repurchase Agreement-
5.18
--USA
5Repurchase Agreement-
3.89
--USA
6Home Depot, Inc. (The)HD
3.35
Consumer DiscTraditional RetailUSA
7Repurchase Agreement-
2.85
--USA
8TJX Cos., Inc. (The)TJX
2.50
Consumer DiscTraditional RetailUSA
9McDonald'sMCD
2.36
Consumer DiscHospitalityUSA
10Booking HoldingsBKNG
1.96
Consumer DiscE-CommerceUSA
ⓘ Methodology

Sector, country and factor detail need a security match; the share of weight that matched is a member figure, so the rows without one appear here with those columns blank. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Leveraged Funds

Total Holdings56
Effective Holdings11
Top 10 Weight61.2%
Max Position17.9%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)64%
Top Country (of Net Assets)82%
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for definitions. Solid blue dots mark the fund: percentage rows on a 0–100% scale, holdings counts log-scaled across the clean-universe 5th–95th percentile range. The shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Leveraged Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 5/31/2026.

Benchmark DifferentiationRef: Leveraged Funds

vs SPYBroad Benchmark
Active Share90.7%
ⓘ Methodology

One sub-card per benchmark: the market primary, then the style secondary — the gap between them is the style sleeve itself. Both anchors are Sparkline-inferred (market from asset class and region, style from the holdings size-and-style map), not the fund's official prospectus benchmark. Solid blue dot marks the fund; the shaded band spans the reference set's 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median (band follows the Peer Universe selector). Active Share compares the fund's book with the benchmark's, share for share; Tracking Error is the annualized daily deviation over the trailing two years (ruler runs to just past the universe's 95th percentile, or past the fund's own figure where that is larger); Benchmark Correlation is the plain daily correlation over the trailing year. Hover the labels for full definitions.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
UCC
ProShares Ultra Consumer Discretionary
Peer Group
703 funds
Peer Asset Class
749 funds
YTD Return
-18.41%-10.30%44-10.88%45
1Y Return
-17.68%7.47%37-0.94%37
3Y Return (Ann.)
13.42%24.82%3124.24%35
5Y Return (Ann.)
-3.34%7.34%166.79%20
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
0.95%0.99%550.99%55
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (768 share classes across 703 funds). One share class shown per fund — the exchange-listed class where the SEC series has one, else its longest-history class; percentile ranks and medians are computed against the same deduped set. Quartile chips fill the layer the fund's rank falls in (top layer = best quartile). Funds without a full return history rank only on the horizons they cover.

Similar Funds

See more rows — create a free account▾

Nearest funds across the whole universe, by holdings and behavior — the peer taxonomy is ignored, so matches can come from any category.

Top Similarity74
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1XLY
State Street(R) Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
74-----
2CYPIX
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY ULTRASECTOR PROFUND
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
74-----
3WANT
Direxion Daily Consumer Discretionary Bull 3X Shares
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
73-----
4VCR
VANGUARD CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY INDEX FUND
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
57-----
5FDIS
Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
57-----
6FSCPX
Select Consumer Discretionary Portfolio
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
53-----
7RXI
iShares Global Consumer Discretionary ETF
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
46-----
8IYC
iShares U.S. Consumer Discretionary ETF
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
Sector - Consumer Discretionary
46-----
9NITE
THE NIGHTVIEW FUND
US Large Core
US Large Core
22-----
10TESL
Simplify Volt TSLA Revolution ETF
Allocation - Conservative
Allocation - Conservative
22-----

The method columns are members-only — create a free account to see these figures.

ⓘ Methodology

Rows are the consensus top matches (a fund must place in at least two methods' top 250 to qualify, and matches missing more than one of this fund's own methods are not ranked — a row scored on fewer methods is a noisier estimate, not a better match). Click a method column to see that method's own top matches across the whole universe instead. Gray (N) beside each method's metric is that fund's rank in the whole universe on that method. Similarity is a percentile among match-grade fund pairs, 0–100 — 87 means the pair is closer than 87% of the strongest matches in the universe, averaged across the methods — so it compares across funds: index clones tie at the top with thousands of other clone pairs, so scores top out in the high 80s to 90s, while a one-of-a-kind fund's best match can score in the 30s. Rows are ordered by the Consensus Rank — the geometric mean of those universe ranks, shown in each cell's tooltip — and the score is held down the list to the level of the closest match above it, so equal scores mean equally close and the number reads as a floor. A dash means that method has no figure for the pair at all (one of them lacks the holdings or return history it needs). Hover a column header for each method's definition. The “Top…” strips above compare against every fund's own top match across the whole universe (they deliberately don't follow the Peer Universe selector); Top Similarity is simply the best match's score, with no reference band; the Holdings and Active Tilt strips carry no reference band because computing every fund's best book overlap would require a full holdings scan per fund — the dot stands alone on its natural 0–100% scale. One share class shown per fund, and a fund's own sister share classes are excluded from its Top-match strips. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Consensus Rank is the geometric mean of the match's universe-wide rank across the methods (#1.0 = top match on every one). Holdings Overlap = common-holdings weight (sum of the minimum weight across shared positions, long only). Active Tilt Overlap = the same statistic on active weights (holdings minus the fund's own default benchmark, floored at 0), which strips the benchmark ballast that dominates raw overlap. Factor Similarity = 100 − a signature-weighted RMS gap across the composite factor scores (0–100 ranks within the clean equity fund universe), each axis weighted by how far this fund sits from the universe median of 50. Return Correlation = correlation of market-hedged daily returns over the trailing two years (CAPM residuals), so only market-beta co-movement is removed; requires ~18 months of daily history (378 of the window's 504 trading days). Fama-French Similarity = 1/(1+d), where d is the Euclidean distance between factor betas (market, size, value, profitability, investment, momentum, intangible value) from up to three years of daily returns (min 378 daily observations and regression R² of at least 0.25); 1.00 = identical loadings.