GLL vs. QLD
GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - GLL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold (-200%), while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLL returned -20.63%/yr vs 33.87%/yr for QLD. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
GLL vs. QLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLL achieves a 5.05% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 25.90% return. Over the past 10 years, GLL has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of -20.63%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 33.87% annualized return.
GLL
- 1D
- 3.90%
- 1M
- 18.00%
- 6M
- 19.80%
- YTD
- 5.05%
- 1Y
- -37.00%
- 3Y*
- -37.43%
- 5Y*
- -27.00%
- 10Y*
- -20.63%
QLD
- 1D
- -3.32%
- 1M
- -7.16%
- 6M
- 23.22%
- YTD
- 25.90%
- 1Y
- 48.13%
- 3Y*
- 37.48%
- 5Y*
- 19.69%
- 10Y*
- 33.87%
GLL vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 5.05% | -62.81% | -33.33% | -14.91% | -2.12% | 1.66% | -41.47% | -26.95% | 5.39% | -23.67% |
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ | 25.90% | 30.36% | 42.82% | 117.72% | -60.52% | 54.67% | 88.90% | 81.69% | -8.31% | 70.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLL and QLD is -0.28, 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 | -0.28 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.14 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.10 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2008 | -0.05 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between GLL and QLD has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.05 to -0.28, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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
GLL vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank
GLL
QLD
GLL vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) 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.
| GLL | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.90 | 1.23 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.57 | 1.92 | -2.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.83 | 6.24 | -7.08 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLL vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLL drawdown since its inception was -99.24%, which is greater than QLD's maximum drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLL and QLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLL | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.24% | -83.13% | -16.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -65.10% | -25.13% | -39.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -87.95% | -42.29% | -45.66% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -89.76% | -63.68% | -26.08% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -95.76% | -63.68% | -32.08% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -98.70% | -11.84% | -86.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -85.20% | -18.11% | -67.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 44.38% | 7.73% | +36.65% |
Volatility
GLL vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) is 12.83%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 14.98%. This indicates that GLL 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
| GLL | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.83% | 14.98% | -2.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 46.49% | 30.86% | +15.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 55.17% | 37.22% | +17.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.73% | 45.59% | -8.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.44% | 44.86% | -12.42% |
GLL vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GLL and QLD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
GLL vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison
GLL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
GLL and QLD 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.
QLD has higher volatility (14.98%) compared to GLL (12.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLL dropped -99.24% vs QLD's -83.13%.
On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 33.87% vs -20.63% for GLL. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, GLL has been the lower-risk option at 12.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 33.87% return vs -20.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLL and QLD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
QLD has the higher dividend yield at 0.13%, compared with 0.00% for GLL.
GLL is categorized as Leveraged Commodities, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. GLL tracks Bloomberg Gold (-200%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%).
QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.30 vs -0.67), 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 GLL 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