GDXY vs. TQQQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GDXY (YieldMax Gold Miners Option Income Strategy ETF) and TQQQ (ProShares UltraPro QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - GDXY is a Derivative Income fund managed by YieldMax, while TQQQ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (300%). Over the past year, GDXY returned 30.32% vs 137.89% for TQQQ. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDXY charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TQQQ.

Performance

GDXY vs. TQQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax Gold Miners Option Income Strategy ETF (GDXY) and ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDXY achieves a -6.82% return, which is significantly lower than TQQQ's 64.46% return.

GDXY

• 1D: -2.47%
• 1M: -2.37%
• YTD: -6.82%
• 6M: -3.09%
• 1Y: 30.32%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TQQQ

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 33.35%
• YTD: 64.46%
• 6M: 55.93%
• 1Y: 137.89%
• 3Y*: 69.49%
• 5Y*: 28.37%
• 10Y*: 45.33%

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

GDXY vs. TQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GDXY YieldMax Gold Miners Option Income Strategy ETF	-6.82%	88.08%	-11.63%
TQQQ ProShares UltraPro QQQ	64.46%	34.35%	23.82%

Correlation

The correlation between GDXY and TQQQ is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2024	0.27

Return for Risk

GDXY vs. TQQQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDXY

GDXY Risk / Return Rank: 23
GDXY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
GDXY Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
GDXY Omega Ratio Rank: 25
GDXY Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
GDXY Martin Ratio Rank: 22

TQQQ

TQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 71
TQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
TQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
TQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 65
TQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
TQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

GDXY vs. TQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax Gold Miners Option Income Strategy ETF (GDXY) and ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ). 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.

	GDXY	TQQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.83	2.92	-2.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.18	3.09	-1.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.40	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.09	3.75	-2.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.77	12.27	-9.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GDXY vs. TQQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDXY Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is lower than the TQQQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDXY and TQQQ, 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

	GDXY	TQQQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83	2.92	-2.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.43	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.69	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.76	0.74	+0.02

Drawdowns

GDXY vs. TQQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDXY drawdown since its inception was -28.03%, smaller than the maximum TQQQ drawdown of -81.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDXY and TQQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDXY	TQQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.03%	-81.66%	+53.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.03%	-36.97%	+8.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-58.04%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-81.66%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-81.66%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.20%	-0.76%	-24.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.40%	-18.52%	+12.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.96%	11.28%	-0.32%

Volatility

GDXY vs. TQQQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for YieldMax Gold Miners Option Income Strategy ETF (GDXY) is 11.75%, while ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ) has a volatility of 13.29%. This indicates that GDXY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDXY	TQQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.75%	13.29%	-1.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	30.92%	36.04%	-5.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.57%	47.60%	-11.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.73%	66.53%	-34.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.73%	65.96%	-34.23%

GDXY vs. TQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDXY has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than TQQQ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDXY vs. TQQQ - Dividend Comparison

GDXY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 74.25%, more than TQQQ's 0.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GDXY YieldMax Gold Miners Option Income Strategy ETF	74.25%	52.13%	23.91%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TQQQ ProShares UltraPro QQQ	0.36%	0.65%	1.27%	1.26%	0.57%	0.00%	0.00%	0.06%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDXY and TQQQ in my portfolio?

GDXY and TQQQ have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GDXY or TQQQ?

TQQQ has higher volatility (13.29%) compared to GDXY (11.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDXY dropped -28.03% vs TQQQ's -81.66%.

Which ETF is better, GDXY or TQQQ?

On 1-year performance, TQQQ leads with 137.89% vs 30.32% for GDXY. On fees, TQQQ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, GDXY has been the lower-risk option at 11.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDXY or TQQQ?

Over the 1-year period, TQQQ has performed better with a 137.89% return vs 30.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDXY or TQQQ?

TQQQ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for GDXY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GDXY or TQQQ?

GDXY has the higher dividend yield at 74.25%, compared with 0.36% for TQQQ.

What is the main difference between GDXY and TQQQ?

GDXY is categorized as Derivative Income, while TQQQ is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for GDXY and 0.95% for TQQQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TQQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 0.83), 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.