EMTY vs. QBTZ
EMTY (ProShares Decline of the Retail Store ETF) and QBTZ (Defiance Daily Target 2X Short QBTS ETF) are both Inverse Equities funds. EMTY is passively managed, while QBTZ is actively managed. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMTY charges 0.66%/yr vs 1.29%/yr for QBTZ.
Performance
EMTY vs. QBTZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMTY achieves a 0.39% return, which is significantly higher than QBTZ's -87.12% return.
EMTY
- 1D
- -0.42%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- YTD
- 0.39%
- 6M
- 1.16%
- 1Y
- -0.49%
- 3Y*
- -3.59%
- 5Y*
- -2.54%
- 10Y*
- —
QBTZ
- 1D
- -4.65%
- 1M
- 5.13%
- YTD
- -87.12%
- 6M
- -84.66%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMTY vs. QBTZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EMTY ProShares Decline of the Retail Store ETF | 0.39% | 5.08% |
QBTZ Defiance Daily Target 2X Short QBTS ETF | -87.12% | -47.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMTY and QBTZ is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2025 | 0.16 |
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
EMTY vs. QBTZ — Risk / Return Rank
EMTY
QBTZ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
EMTY vs. QBTZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Decline of the Retail Store ETF (EMTY) and Defiance Daily Target 2X Short QBTS ETF (QBTZ). 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.
| EMTY | QBTZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.07 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMTY vs. QBTZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMTY drawdown since its inception was -77.62%, smaller than the maximum QBTZ drawdown of -96.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMTY and QBTZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMTY | QBTZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -77.62% | -96.03% | +18.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.91% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.83% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.83% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -74.94% | -95.52% | +20.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -54.39% | -58.19% | +3.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.26% | — | — |
Volatility
EMTY vs. QBTZ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMTY | QBTZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.20% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.81% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.77% | 234.15% | -216.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.36% | 234.15% | -211.79% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.63% | 234.15% | -208.52% |
EMTY vs. QBTZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMTY has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than QBTZ's 1.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMTY vs. QBTZ - Dividend Comparison
EMTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.47%, while QBTZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMTY ProShares Decline of the Retail Store ETF | 3.47% | 3.83% | 6.00% | 4.41% | 0.65% | 0.00% | 0.07% | 0.82% | 0.62% | 0.03% |
QBTZ Defiance Daily Target 2X Short QBTS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMTY and QBTZ have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EMTY is cheaper at 0.66% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EMTY is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for QBTZ.
EMTY has the higher dividend yield at 3.47%, compared with 0.00% for QBTZ.
They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Defiance ETFs. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for EMTY and 1.29% for QBTZ.
Find the right allocation for EMTY and QBTZ
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