EUM vs. SQQQ
EUM (ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets) and SQQQ (ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - EUM is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index (-100%), while SQQQ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EUM returned -9.08%/yr vs -55.08%/yr for SQQQ. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
EUM vs. SQQQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EUM achieves a -16.78% return, which is significantly higher than SQQQ's -38.86% return. Over the past 10 years, EUM has outperformed SQQQ with an annualized return of -9.08%, while SQQQ has yielded a comparatively lower -55.08% annualized return.
EUM
- 1D
- 2.11%
- 1M
- 6.40%
- 6M
- -11.71%
- YTD
- -16.78%
- 1Y
- -25.07%
- 3Y*
- -13.17%
- 5Y*
- -4.72%
- 10Y*
- -9.08%
SQQQ
- 1D
- 5.01%
- 1M
- 8.33%
- 6M
- -36.79%
- YTD
- -38.86%
- 1Y
- -54.36%
- 3Y*
- -50.96%
- 5Y*
- -45.88%
- 10Y*
- -55.08%
EUM vs. SQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EUM ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets | -16.78% | -22.61% | -0.83% | -3.89% | 21.11% | -1.32% | -24.37% | -15.27% | 14.60% | -28.08% |
SQQQ ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ | -38.86% | -53.05% | -49.79% | -73.61% | 82.40% | -60.87% | -86.40% | -65.92% | -20.83% | -58.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between EUM and SQQQ is 0.79, 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 | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2010 | 0.67 |
The correlation between EUM and SQQQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (5 years) to 0.79 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
EUM vs. SQQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EUM
SQQQ
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
EUM
SQQQ
Basic Materials
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Communication Services
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Consumer Cyclical
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Consumer Defensive
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Energy
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Healthcare
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Industrials
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Real Estate
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Technology
EUM
-
SQQQ
-
Utilities
EUM
-
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
EUM vs. SQQQ — Risk / Return Rank
EUM
SQQQ
EUM vs. SQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets (EUM) 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.
| EUM | SQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.06 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.82 | 0.83 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.76 | -0.89 | +0.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.41 | -1.63 | +0.22 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EUM vs. SQQQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EUM drawdown since its inception was -93.19%, smaller than the maximum SQQQ drawdown of -100.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EUM and SQQQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EUM | SQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -93.19% | -100.00% | +6.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -33.23% | -61.03% | +27.80% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -47.97% | -92.51% | +44.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -50.87% | -97.27% | +46.40% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -66.12% | -99.97% | +33.85% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -92.49% | -100.00% | +7.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -77.24% | -92.76% | +15.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.85% | 33.36% | -15.51% |
Volatility
EUM vs. SQQQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets (EUM) is 9.82%, while ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ (SQQQ) has a volatility of 22.32%. This indicates that EUM 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
| EUM | SQQQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.82% | 22.32% | -12.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.92% | 46.22% | -24.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.11% | 55.87% | -31.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.96% | 67.91% | -47.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.75% | 66.57% | -45.82% |
EUM vs. SQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both EUM and SQQQ have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
EUM vs. SQQQ - Dividend Comparison
EUM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.06%, less than SQQQ's 9.77% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EUM ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets | 4.06% | 3.98% | 4.22% | 3.86% | 0.82% | 0.00% | 0.15% | 1.35% | 0.88% | 0.00% |
SQQQ ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ | 9.77% | 9.36% | 10.23% | 8.01% | 0.28% | 0.00% | 2.15% | 2.92% | 1.47% | 0.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EUM and SQQQ have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SQQQ has higher volatility (22.32%) compared to EUM (9.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EUM dropped -93.19% vs SQQQ's -100.00%.
On 10-year performance, EUM leads with -9.08% vs -55.08% for SQQQ. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, EUM has been the lower-risk option at 9.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EUM has performed better with a -9.08% return vs -55.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EUM and SQQQ have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
SQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 9.77%, compared with 4.06% for EUM.
EUM is categorized as Inverse Equities, while SQQQ is Leveraged Equities. EUM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index (-100%), while SQQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (-300%).
SQQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.98 vs -1.04), 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 EUM 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