BETH vs. QLD

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

BETH (ProShares Bitcoin & Ether Market Cap Weight Strategy ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - BETH is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by ProShares, while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). BETH is actively managed, while QLD is passively managed. Over the past year, BETH returned -48.65% vs 52.34% for QLD. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

BETH vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Bitcoin & Ether Market Cap Weight Strategy ETF (BETH) 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, BETH achieves a -32.25% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 28.12% return.

BETH

• 1D: -2.63%
• 1M: -1.29%
• 6M: -35.06%
• YTD: -32.25%
• 1Y: -48.65%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QLD

• 1D: -3.81%
• 1M: -3.42%
• 6M: 23.12%
• YTD: 28.12%
• 1Y: 52.34%
• 3Y*: 39.12%
• 5Y*: 19.39%
• 10Y*: 34.28%

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

BETH vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BETH ProShares Bitcoin & Ether Market Cap Weight Strategy ETF	-32.25%	-11.20%	85.03%	39.34%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	28.12%	30.36%	42.82%	28.19%

Correlation

The correlation between BETH and QLD is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2023	0.40

Return for Risk

BETH vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

BETH

BETH Risk / Return Rank: 2
BETH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
BETH Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
BETH Omega Ratio Rank: 2
BETH Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
BETH Martin Ratio Rank: 2

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 50
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 48
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

BETH vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Bitcoin & Ether Market Cap Weight Strategy ETF (BETH) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BETH	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.03	1.42	-2.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.57	1.90	-3.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	1.25	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.85	2.09	-2.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.38	6.85	-8.23

BETH vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BETH Sharpe Ratio is -1.03, which is lower than the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BETH 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.

Drawdowns

BETH vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BETH drawdown since its inception was -57.12%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BETH and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	BETH	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.12%	-83.13%	+26.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-57.12%	-25.13%	-31.99%
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	-54.21%	-10.29%	-43.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.99%	-18.11%	-0.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	35.30%	7.66%	+27.64%

Volatility

BETH vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Bitcoin & Ether Market Cap Weight Strategy ETF (BETH) is 11.98%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 17.17%. This indicates that BETH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BETH	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.98%	17.17%	-5.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.80%	30.63%	+6.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.57%	37.07%	+10.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	50.96%	45.56%	+5.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	50.96%	44.86%	+6.10%

BETH vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BETH and QLD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

BETH vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

BETH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 54.79%, more than QLD's 0.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BETH ProShares Bitcoin & Ether Market Cap Weight Strategy ETF	54.79%	57.68%	19.71%	0.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.13%	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 BETH and QLD in my portfolio?

BETH and QLD have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BETH or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (17.17%) compared to BETH (11.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BETH dropped -57.12% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, BETH or QLD?

On 1-year performance, QLD leads with 52.34% vs -48.65% for BETH. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, BETH has been the lower-risk option at 11.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BETH or QLD?

Over the 1-year period, QLD has performed better with a 52.34% return vs -48.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BETH or QLD?

BETH and QLD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

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

BETH has the higher dividend yield at 54.79%, compared with 0.13% for QLD.

What is the main difference between BETH and QLD?

BETH is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while QLD is Leveraged Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.42 vs -1.03), 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.