It's still the same amount of ULF on the disk....So no BEQ doesn't increase the amount of ULF but it does increase the depth/extension of the ULF on the disk. So the percentage is the same.
The BEQ conversation increasingly seems like a tomato/tomahto discussion to me, since people are using the term "more ULF" in different ways. Perhaps it helps a bit to frame the discussion in the following way. It is very hard to hear frequencies below about 20Hz, in conjunction with other bass sounds, until the volume of the ULF sounds approaches about 100Hz. That number probably varies depending on the noise floor of the room, the overall volume level, the specific hearing of the individual, etc. But, 100db is a pretty good number to use for discussion purposes.
BEQ doesn't create ULF that never existed in a soundtrack to start with, but it also doesn't simply increase the loudness of that ULF content. In many cases, it may change the ULF from non-existent, by reason of inaudibility, to perceptible, thereby enhancing the overall special effects. So, it doesn't add to the overall percentage of ULF in a movie, but it may absolutely add to the overall audibility of ULF in a movie.
Just thought I would throw that distinction out there, for what it's worth.
Edit: There is something else that I think may be worth noting. People who are already implementing a significant low-bass house curve may be doing the equivalent of Bass EQ for all of their movies. If they are lifting their