GDXU vs. QTJL

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GDXU (MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN) and QTJL (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July) are both Leveraged Equities funds. GDXU is passively managed, while QTJL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GDXU returned 47.72%/yr vs 19.18%/yr for QTJL. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDXU charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QTJL.

Performance

GDXU vs. QTJL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN (GDXU) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDXU achieves a -41.62% return, which is significantly lower than QTJL's 7.18% return.

GDXU

• 1D: 3.90%
• 1M: -8.04%
• YTD: -41.62%
• 6M: -31.92%
• 1Y: 76.85%
• 3Y*: 47.72%
• 5Y*: -10.23%
• 10Y*: —

QTJL

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 1.08%
• YTD: 7.18%
• 6M: 7.93%
• 1Y: 20.28%
• 3Y*: 19.18%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GDXU vs. QTJL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GDXU MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN	-41.62%	796.47%	-18.60%	-21.36%	-62.82%	-28.58%
QTJL Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July	7.18%	21.07%	16.50%	42.39%	-30.16%	9.32%

Correlation

The correlation between GDXU and QTJL is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2021	0.22

GDXU vs. QTJL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GDXU	QTJL
Basic Materials	100.0%	1.2%
Communication Services	-	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.6%
Energy	-	0.6%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	54.2%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

GDXU vs. QTJL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

GDXU

GDXU Risk / Return Rank: 25
GDXU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
GDXU Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
GDXU Omega Ratio Rank: 33
GDXU Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
GDXU Martin Ratio Rank: 19

QTJL

QTJL Risk / Return Rank: 68
QTJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
QTJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
QTJL Omega Ratio Rank: 71
QTJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
QTJL Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

GDXU vs. QTJL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN (GDXU) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL). 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.

	GDXU	QTJL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.56	2.04	-1.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.56	2.90	-1.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.41	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.04	3.05	-2.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.11	16.05	-13.94
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GDXU vs. QTJL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDXU Sharpe Ratio is 0.56, which is lower than the QTJL Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDXU and QTJL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GDXU	QTJL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.56	2.04	-1.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.09	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.08	0.52	-0.61

Drawdowns

GDXU vs. QTJL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDXU drawdown since its inception was -94.39%, which is greater than QTJL's maximum drawdown of -33.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDXU and QTJL.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDXU	QTJL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.39%	-33.40%	-60.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-73.99%	-6.68%	-67.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-73.99%	-22.43%	-51.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-92.93%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-72.90%	0.00%	-72.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-69.77%	-7.93%	-61.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	36.52%	1.27%	+35.25%

Volatility

GDXU vs. QTJL - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN (GDXU) has a higher volatility of 46.65% compared to Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL) at 0.30%. This indicates that GDXU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QTJL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDXU	QTJL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	46.65%	0.30%	+46.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	118.08%	7.60%	+110.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	137.54%	9.99%	+127.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	110.85%	20.42%	+90.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	110.00%	20.42%	+89.58%

GDXU vs. QTJL - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDXU has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QTJL's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDXU vs. QTJL - Dividend Comparison

Neither GDXU nor QTJL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDXU and QTJL in my portfolio?

GDXU and QTJL have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GDXU or QTJL?

GDXU has higher volatility (46.65%) compared to QTJL (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDXU dropped -94.39% vs QTJL's -33.40%.

Which ETF is better, GDXU or QTJL?

On 3-year performance, GDXU leads with 47.72% vs 19.18% for QTJL. On fees, QTJL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTJL has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDXU or QTJL?

Over the 3-year period, GDXU has performed better with a 47.72% return vs 19.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDXU or QTJL?

QTJL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GDXU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GDXU or QTJL?

GDXU and QTJL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between GDXU and QTJL?

They also come from different issuers: BMO and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for GDXU and 0.79% for QTJL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTJL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 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.