ETHT vs. QLD
ETHT (ProShares Ultra Ether ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - ETHT is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Bloomberg Ethereum Index (200%), while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ETHT returned -76.37% vs 85.49% for QLD. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ETHT charges 0.94%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.
Performance
ETHT vs. QLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ETHT achieves a -72.39% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 42.06% return.
ETHT
- 1D
- -11.32%
- 1M
- -43.48%
- YTD
- -72.39%
- 6M
- -76.21%
- 1Y
- -76.37%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QLD
- 1D
- -0.53%
- 1M
- 21.54%
- YTD
- 42.06%
- 6M
- 37.45%
- 1Y
- 85.49%
- 3Y*
- 50.15%
- 5Y*
- 25.75%
- 10Y*
- 36.10%
ETHT vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
ETHT ProShares Ultra Ether ETF | -72.39% | -64.86% | -41.68% |
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ | 42.06% | 30.36% | 16.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between ETHT and QLD is 0.51, 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 | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 10, 2024 | 0.51 |
The correlation between ETHT and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
ETHT vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank
ETHT
QLD
ETHT vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Ether ETF (ETHT) 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.
| ETHT | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.41 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.83 | 3.42 | -4.25 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.22 | 11.92 | -13.14 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ETHT | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.56 | 2.70 | -3.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.58 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.81 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.54 | 0.60 | -1.13 |
Drawdowns
ETHT vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ETHT drawdown since its inception was -94.34%, which is greater than QLD's maximum drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ETHT and QLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ETHT | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -94.34% | -83.13% | -11.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -91.91% | -25.13% | -66.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -42.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -63.68% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -63.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.34% | -0.53% | -93.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -64.82% | -18.17% | -46.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 62.48% | 7.20% | +55.28% |
Volatility
ETHT vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra Ether ETF (ETHT) has a higher volatility of 20.43% compared to ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) at 8.90%. This indicates that ETHT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ETHT | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 20.43% | 8.90% | +11.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 92.88% | 24.08% | +68.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 136.57% | 31.85% | +104.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 142.90% | 44.74% | +98.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 142.90% | 44.56% | +98.34% |
ETHT vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
ETHT has a 0.94% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
ETHT vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison
ETHT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 17.20%, more than QLD's 0.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ETHT ProShares Ultra Ether ETF | 17.20% | 4.57% | 0.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ | 0.12% | 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
ETHT and QLD have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ETHT has higher volatility (20.43%) compared to QLD (8.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ETHT dropped -94.34% vs QLD's -83.13%.
On 1-year performance, QLD leads with 85.49% vs -76.37% for ETHT. On fees, ETHT is cheaper at 0.94% per year. On volatility, QLD has been the lower-risk option at 8.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QLD has performed better with a 85.49% return vs -76.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ETHT is cheaper with a 0.94% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.
ETHT has the higher dividend yield at 17.20%, compared with 0.12% for QLD.
ETHT is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. ETHT tracks Bloomberg Ethereum Index (200%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.94% for ETHT and 0.95% for QLD.
QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs -0.56), 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 ETHT 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