PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
DGP vs. QLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

DGP vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

DGP (DB Gold Double Long Exchange Traded Notes) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - DGP is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Gold (200%), while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, DGP returned 19.21%/yr vs 35.29%/yr for QLD. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DGP charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

DGP vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DB Gold Double Long Exchange Traded Notes (DGP) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DGP achieves a -4.85% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 31.05% return. Over the past 10 years, DGP has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of 19.21%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 35.29% annualized return.

DGP

1D
0.46%
1M
-16.73%
YTD
-4.85%
6M
0.37%
1Y
52.74%
3Y*
53.91%
5Y*
29.00%
10Y*
19.21%

QLD

1D
3.03%
1M
0.58%
YTD
31.05%
6M
26.63%
1Y
69.67%
3Y*
46.32%
5Y*
23.57%
10Y*
35.29%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DGP vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DGP
DB Gold Double Long Exchange Traded Notes		-4.85%141.40%53.16%16.97%-5.54%-11.29%45.29%32.27%-7.48%24.20%
QLD
ProShares Ultra QQQ		31.05%30.36%42.82%117.72%-60.52%54.67%88.90%81.69%-8.31%70.34%

Correlation

The correlation between DGP and QLD is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.22

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.13

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.09

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2008

0.04

The correlation between DGP and QLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (all time) to 0.22 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

DB Gold Double Long Exchange Traded Notes

ProShares Ultra QQQ

Often compared with DGP:
DGP vs. UGLDGP vs. GFIDGP vs. JNUGDGP vs. WPMDGP vs. LYFTDGP vs. IAUDGP vs. IAUM
Often compared with QLD:
QLD vs. QQQQLD vs. TQQQQLD vs. SSOQLD vs. QQQMQLD vs. UPROQLD vs. VOOQLD vs. SPY

Return for Risk

DGP vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
DGP
DGP Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
DGP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGP Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGP Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
DGP Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGP Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
QLD
QLD Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

DGP vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DB Gold Double Long Exchange Traded Notes (DGP) 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.

DGPQLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.00
2.10

-1.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.50
2.52

-1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.34

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.43

2.79

-1.35

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.59

9.64

-6.05

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DGP vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DGP Sharpe Ratio is 1.00, which is lower than the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGP 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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

DGPQLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.00

2.10

-1.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

0.53

+0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

0.79

-0.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.58

-0.31

Drawdowns

DGP vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGP drawdown since its inception was -75.31%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGP and QLD.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

DGPQLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-75.31%

-83.13%

+7.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-36.98%

-25.13%

-11.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-36.98%

-42.29%

+5.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-51.24%

-63.68%

+12.44%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-51.24%

-63.68%

+12.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-36.69%

-8.24%

-28.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-41.09%

-18.16%

-22.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

14.75%

7.25%

+7.50%

Volatility

DGP vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for DB Gold Double Long Exchange Traded Notes (DGP) is 10.97%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 13.78%. This indicates that DGP 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

DGPQLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.97%

13.78%

-2.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

46.99%

26.34%

+20.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

53.01%

33.42%

+19.59%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

38.91%

44.95%

-6.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

35.11%

44.68%

-9.57%

DGP vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

DGP has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

DGP vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

DGP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DGP
DB Gold Double Long Exchange Traded Notes		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		0.13%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

DGP and QLD have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QLD has higher volatility (13.78%) compared to DGP (10.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGP dropped -75.31% vs QLD's -83.13%.

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 35.29% vs 19.21% for DGP. On fees, DGP is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, DGP has been the lower-risk option at 10.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 35.29% return vs 19.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DGP is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.

QLD has the higher dividend yield at 0.13%, compared with 0.00% for DGP.

DGP is categorized as Leveraged Commodities, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. DGP tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Gold (200%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DGP and 0.95% for QLD.

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 1.00), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DGP and QLD

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