EMTY vs. QLD
EMTY (ProShares Decline of the Retail Store ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - EMTY is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Solactive-ProShares Bricks and Mortar Retail Store Index (-100%), while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMTY returned -2.54%/yr vs 21.41%/yr for QLD. At a correlation of -0.47, they often move in opposite directions. EMTY charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.
Performance
EMTY vs. QLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMTY achieves a 0.39% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 29.58% return.
EMTY
- 1D
- -0.42%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- YTD
- 0.39%
- 6M
- 1.16%
- 1Y
- -0.49%
- 3Y*
- -3.59%
- 5Y*
- -2.54%
- 10Y*
- —
QLD
- 1D
- -6.61%
- 1M
- -2.02%
- YTD
- 29.58%
- 6M
- 26.13%
- 1Y
- 66.80%
- 3Y*
- 43.61%
- 5Y*
- 21.41%
- 10Y*
- 36.27%
EMTY vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMTY ProShares Decline of the Retail Store ETF | 0.39% | -1.76% | -4.13% | 0.27% | 4.32% | -37.39% | -31.92% | -8.65% | 11.16% | -15.97% |
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ | 29.58% | 30.36% | 42.82% | 117.72% | -60.52% | 54.67% | 88.90% | 81.69% | -8.31% | 4.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMTY and QLD is -0.26, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2017 | -0.47 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between EMTY and QLD has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.47 to -0.26, meaning they move in opposite directions less often than they have historically.
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. QLD — Risk / Return Rank
EMTY
QLD
EMTY vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Decline of the Retail Store ETF (EMTY) 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.
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 | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.31 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | 2.67 | -2.71 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.07 | 9.05 | -9.12 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMTY vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMTY drawdown since its inception was -77.62%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMTY and QLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMTY | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -77.62% | -83.13% | +5.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.91% | -25.13% | +11.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.83% | -42.29% | +11.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.83% | -63.68% | +32.85% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -63.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -74.94% | -9.26% | -65.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -54.39% | -18.14% | -36.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.26% | 7.40% | -0.14% |
Volatility
EMTY vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares Decline of the Retail Store ETF (EMTY) is 5.20%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 18.22%. This indicates that EMTY 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
| EMTY | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.20% | 18.22% | -13.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.81% | 28.95% | -16.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.77% | 35.77% | -18.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.36% | 45.34% | -22.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.63% | 44.80% | -19.17% |
EMTY vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMTY has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMTY vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison
EMTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.47%, more than QLD's 0.13% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 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
EMTY and QLD have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QLD has higher volatility (18.22%) compared to EMTY (5.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMTY dropped -77.62% vs QLD's -83.13%.
On 5-year performance, QLD leads with 21.41% vs -2.54% for EMTY. On fees, EMTY is cheaper at 0.66% per year. On volatility, EMTY has been the lower-risk option at 5.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QLD has performed better with a 21.41% return vs -2.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EMTY is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.
EMTY has the higher dividend yield at 3.47%, compared with 0.13% for QLD.
EMTY is categorized as Inverse Equities, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. EMTY tracks Solactive-ProShares Bricks and Mortar Retail Store Index (-100%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.66% for EMTY and 0.95% for QLD.
QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs -0.03), 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 EMTY 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