CTEX vs. SQQQ
CTEX (ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF) and SQQQ (ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - CTEX is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Kensho Cleantech Index, while SQQQ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CTEX returned 1.78%/yr vs -49.83%/yr for SQQQ. Their -0.60 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. CTEX charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for SQQQ.
Performance
CTEX vs. SQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CTEX achieves a -4.20% return, which is significantly higher than SQQQ's -34.61% return.
CTEX
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- -16.09%
- 6M
- -14.26%
- YTD
- -4.20%
- 1Y
- 45.57%
- 3Y*
- 1.78%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -3.23%
SQQQ
- 1D
- -1.99%
- 1M
- 9.46%
- 6M
- -32.40%
- YTD
- -34.61%
- 1Y
- -52.32%
- 3Y*
- -49.83%
- 5Y*
- -44.46%
- 10Y*
- -54.48%
- ALL TIME*
- -52.68%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $35.29K | $31.66K | $63.75K | |
| $2.40B | $2.29B | $2.66B |
CTEX vs. SQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CTEX ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF | -4.20% | 67.74% | -20.38% | -10.25% | -20.38% | -6.68% |
SQQQ ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ | -34.61% | -53.05% | -49.79% | -73.61% | 82.40% | -30.44% |
Correlation
The correlation between CTEX and SQQQ is -0.67, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2021 | -0.60 |
The correlation between CTEX and SQQQ shifts across timeframes, from -0.67 (1 year) to -0.55 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CTEX vs. SQQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CTEX
SQQQ
Industrials
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Energy
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Industrials
CTEX
SQQQ
-
Technology
CTEX
SQQQ
-
Utilities
CTEX
SQQQ
-
Consumer Cyclical
CTEX
SQQQ
-
Energy
CTEX
SQQQ
-
Basic Materials
CTEX
-
SQQQ
-
Communication Services
CTEX
-
SQQQ
-
Consumer Defensive
CTEX
-
SQQQ
-
Financial Services
CTEX
-
SQQQ
Healthcare
CTEX
-
SQQQ
-
Real Estate
CTEX
-
SQQQ
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CTEX vs. SQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
CTEX
SQQQ
CTEX vs. SQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) and ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ (SQQQ). 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.
| CTEX | SQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 0.86 | +0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.09 | -0.81 | +1.90 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.44 | -1.41 | +4.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CTEX vs. SQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CTEX drawdown since its inception was -70.31%, smaller than the maximum SQQQ drawdown of -100.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTEX and SQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CTEX | SQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.31% | -100.00% | +29.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -39.09% | -61.03% | +21.94% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -50.47% | -92.51% | +42.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -97.27% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -99.97% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.34% | -100.00% | +65.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.28% | -92.78% | +51.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.38% | 35.08% | -22.70% |
Volatility
CTEX vs. SQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) is 15.81%, while ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ (SQQQ) has a volatility of 20.82%. This indicates that CTEX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CTEX | SQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.81% | 20.82% | -5.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 35.40% | 48.09% | -12.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 46.84% | 57.98% | -11.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.86% | 68.18% | -24.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 43.86% | 66.74% | -22.88% |
CTEX vs. SQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
CTEX has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than SQQQ's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
CTEX vs. SQQQ - Dividend Comparison
CTEX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.18%, less than SQQQ's 9.14% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CTEX ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF | 2.18% | 2.17% | 0.57% | 0.12% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SQQQ ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ | 9.14% | 9.36% | 10.23% | 8.01% | 0.28% | 0.00% | 2.15% | 2.92% | 1.47% | 0.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CTEX and SQQQ have a correlation of -0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SQQQ has higher volatility (20.82%) compared to CTEX (15.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CTEX dropped -70.31% vs SQQQ's -100.00%.
On 3-year performance, CTEX leads with 1.78% vs -49.83% for SQQQ. On fees, CTEX is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, CTEX has been the lower-risk option at 15.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CTEX has performed better with a 1.78% return vs -49.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CTEX is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SQQQ.
SQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 9.14%, compared with 2.18% for CTEX.
CTEX is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while SQQQ is Leveraged Equities. CTEX tracks S&P Kensho Cleantech Index, while SQQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (-300%). Their fees differ too: 0.58% for CTEX and 0.95% for SQQQ.
CTEX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.91 vs -0.86), 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.
Find the right allocation for CTEX and SQQQ
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer