CONL vs. QQQM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CONL (GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF) and QQQM (Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CONL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while QQQM is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. CONL is actively managed, while QQQM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CONL returned -14.86%/yr vs 26.15%/yr for QQQM. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CONL charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QQQM.

Performance

CONL vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CONL achieves a -65.46% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 16.48% return.

CONL

• 1D: -7.83%
• 1M: -30.11%
• YTD: -65.46%
• 6M: -70.11%
• 1Y: -86.06%
• 3Y*: -14.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQM

• 1D: -3.30%
• 1M: -0.42%
• YTD: 16.48%
• 6M: 15.00%
• 1Y: 34.99%
• 3Y*: 26.15%
• 5Y*: 16.11%
• 10Y*: —

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

CONL vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CONL GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF	-65.46%	-58.49%	4.23%	641.63%	-80.40%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	16.48%	20.85%	25.68%	55.01%	-16.62%

Correlation

The correlation between CONL and QQQM is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2022	0.54

The correlation between CONL and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

CONL vs. QQQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CONL	QQQM
Financial Services	100.0%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.0%
Communication Services	-	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.4%
Energy	-	0.5%
Healthcare	-	3.7%
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	58.7%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

CONL vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CONL

CONL Risk / Return Rank: 3
CONL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
CONL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CONL Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CONL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
CONL Martin Ratio Rank: 3

QQQM

QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 60
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

CONL vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). 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.

	CONL	QQQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.63	1.97	-2.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.10	2.58	-3.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.88	1.35	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.93	2.94	-3.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.25	10.88	-12.13

CONL vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CONL Sharpe Ratio is -0.63, which is lower than the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CONL and QQQM, 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

CONL vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CONL drawdown since its inception was -94.36%, which is greater than QQQM's maximum drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CONL and QQQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CONL	QQQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.36%	-35.04%	-59.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-92.57%	-11.96%	-80.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-94.36%	-22.70%	-71.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.06%	-4.24%	-89.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-56.45%	-8.20%	-48.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	68.94%	3.22%	+65.72%

Volatility

CONL vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) has a higher volatility of 36.69% compared to Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) at 9.00%. This indicates that CONL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CONL	QQQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	36.69%	9.00%	+27.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	102.83%	14.43%	+88.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	135.85%	17.85%	+118.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	149.59%	22.53%	+127.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	149.59%	22.30%	+127.29%

CONL vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CONL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

CONL vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

CONL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQQM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.44%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CONL GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQM Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF	0.44%	0.50%	0.61%	0.65%	0.83%	0.40%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CONL and QQQM in my portfolio?

CONL and QQQM have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CONL or QQQM?

CONL has higher volatility (36.69%) compared to QQQM (9.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CONL dropped -94.36% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

Which ETF is better, CONL or QQQM?

On 3-year performance, QQQM leads with 26.15% vs -14.86% for CONL. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QQQM has been the lower-risk option at 9.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CONL or QQQM?

Over the 3-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 26.15% return vs -14.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CONL or QQQM?

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for CONL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CONL or QQQM?

QQQM has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.00% for CONL.

What is the main difference between CONL and QQQM?

CONL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for CONL and 0.15% for QQQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs -0.63), 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.