BULZ vs. TQQQ
Compare and contrast key facts about MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) and ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ).
BULZ and TQQQ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BULZ is a passively managed fund by BMO Financial Group that tracks the performance of the Solactive FANG Innovation. It was launched on Aug 17, 2021. TQQQ is a passively managed fund by ProShares that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ-100 Index (300%). It was launched on Feb 9, 2010. Both BULZ and TQQQ are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: BULZ or TQQQ.
Key characteristics
| BULZ | TQQQ | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 12.73% | 12.24% |
| 1Y Return | 212.63% | 116.47% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 3.23 | 2.34 |
| Daily Std Dev | 65.39% | 48.84% |
| Max Drawdown | -94.44% | -81.66% |
| Current Drawdown | -65.73% | -34.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between BULZ and TQQQ is 0.97, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
BULZ vs. TQQQ - Performance Comparison
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with BULZ having a 12.73% return and TQQQ slightly lower at 12.24%. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
BULZ vs. TQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both BULZ and TQQQ have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
BULZ vs. TQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) and ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ). 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.
Dividends
BULZ vs. TQQQ - Dividend Comparison
BULZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.24%.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TQQQ ProShares UltraPro QQQ | 1.24% | 1.26% | 0.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.06% | 0.11% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.01% | 0.03% |
Drawdowns
BULZ vs. TQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BULZ drawdown since its inception was -94.44%, which is greater than TQQQ's maximum drawdown of -81.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BULZ and TQQQ. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
BULZ vs. TQQQ - Volatility Comparison
MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) has a higher volatility of 22.17% compared to ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ) at 17.43%. This indicates that BULZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.