AMDL vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AMDL (GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds. AMDL is actively managed, while QLD is passively managed. Over the past year, AMDL returned 1189.78% vs 85.49% for QLD. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AMDL charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

AMDL vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMDL achieves a 395.18% return, which is significantly higher than QLD's 42.06% return.

AMDL

• 1D: 8.25%
• 1M: 135.69%
• YTD: 395.18%
• 6M: 371.52%
• 1Y: 1,189.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QLD

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: 21.54%
• YTD: 42.06%
• 6M: 37.45%
• 1Y: 85.49%
• 3Y*: 50.15%
• 5Y*: 25.75%
• 10Y*: 36.10%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMDL vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	395.18%	103.00%	-69.97%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	42.06%	30.36%	27.37%

Correlation

The correlation between AMDL and QLD is 0.59, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2024	0.65

The correlation between AMDL and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

AMDL vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AMDL	QLD
Technology	66.7%	53.8%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Communication Services	-	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.7%
Energy	-	0.6%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

AMDL vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AMDL

AMDL Risk / Return Rank: 96
AMDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
AMDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
AMDL Omega Ratio Rank: 92
AMDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
AMDL Martin Ratio Rank: 97

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 69
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

AMDL vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). 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.

	AMDL	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	9.30	2.70	+6.60
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.81	3.16	+1.65
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.63	1.41	+0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	21.43	3.42	+18.01
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	42.08	11.92	+30.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AMDL vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMDL Sharpe Ratio is 9.30, which is higher than the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMDL and QLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AMDL	QLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.30	2.70	+6.60
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.58	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.81	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.60	-0.04

Drawdowns

AMDL vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMDL drawdown since its inception was -88.63%, which is greater than QLD's maximum drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMDL and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMDL	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.63%	-83.13%	-5.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-56.13%	-25.13%	-31.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-42.29%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-63.68%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.53%	+0.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.58%	-18.17%	-30.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	28.53%	7.20%	+21.33%

Volatility

AMDL vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) has a higher volatility of 46.02% compared to ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) at 8.90%. This indicates that AMDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AMDL	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	46.02%	8.90%	+37.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	94.09%	24.08%	+70.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	129.41%	31.85%	+97.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	116.59%	44.74%	+71.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	116.59%	44.56%	+72.03%

AMDL vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMDL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

AMDL vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

AMDL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.12%	0.17%	0.25%	0.33%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.13%	0.06%	0.02%	0.21%	0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMDL and QLD in my portfolio?

AMDL and QLD have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AMDL or QLD?

AMDL has higher volatility (46.02%) compared to QLD (8.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMDL dropped -88.63% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, AMDL or QLD?

On 1-year performance, AMDL leads with 1189.78% vs 85.49% for QLD. On fees, QLD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, QLD has been the lower-risk option at 8.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AMDL or QLD?

Over the 1-year period, AMDL has performed better with a 1189.78% return vs 85.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMDL or QLD?

QLD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for AMDL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMDL or QLD?

QLD has the higher dividend yield at 0.12%, compared with 0.00% for AMDL.

What is the main difference between AMDL and QLD?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for AMDL and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AMDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (9.30 vs 2.70), 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.