IWDL vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWDL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds - IWDL tracks the Russell 1000 Value (200%) while QLD tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWDL returned 14.46%/yr vs 21.41%/yr for QLD. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

IWDL vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN (IWDL) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IWDL having a 28.58% return and QLD slightly higher at 29.58%.

IWDL

• 1D: -1.65%
• 1M: 3.97%
• YTD: 28.58%
• 6M: 26.90%
• 1Y: 53.41%
• 3Y*: 29.95%
• 5Y*: 14.46%
• 10Y*: —

QLD

• 1D: -6.61%
• 1M: -2.02%
• YTD: 29.58%
• 6M: 26.13%
• 1Y: 66.80%
• 3Y*: 43.61%
• 5Y*: 21.41%
• 10Y*: 36.27%

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

IWDL vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWDL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN	28.58%	25.02%	20.68%	13.50%	-21.27%	40.35%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	29.58%	30.36%	42.82%	117.72%	-60.52%	40.31%

Correlation

The correlation between IWDL and QLD is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.60
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.66

The correlation between IWDL and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IWDL vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWDL

IWDL Risk / Return Rank: 78
IWDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
IWDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
IWDL Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IWDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
IWDL Martin Ratio Rank: 84

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 53
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 51
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

IWDL vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN (IWDL) 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.

	IWDL	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	1.88	+0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	2.33	+0.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.31	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.97	2.67	+1.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.20	9.05	+7.15

IWDL vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWDL Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWDL and QLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IWDL vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWDL drawdown since its inception was -37.95%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWDL and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWDL	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.95%	-83.13%	+45.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.53%	-25.13%	+11.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.78%	-42.29%	+10.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.95%	-63.68%	+25.73%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.12%	-9.26%	+7.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.50%	-18.14%	+7.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.31%	7.40%	-4.09%

Volatility

IWDL vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN (IWDL) is 7.25%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 18.22%. This indicates that IWDL 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.

Volatility by Period

	IWDL	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.25%	18.22%	-10.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.33%	28.95%	-10.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.35%	35.77%	-12.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.33%	45.34%	-15.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.00%	44.80%	-14.80%

IWDL vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IWDL and QLD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

IWDL vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

IWDL 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
IWDL ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Factor TR ETN	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

Can I hold both IWDL and QLD in my portfolio?

IWDL and QLD have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWDL or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (18.22%) compared to IWDL (7.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWDL dropped -37.95% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, IWDL or QLD?

On 5-year performance, QLD leads with 21.41% vs 14.46% for IWDL. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, IWDL has been the lower-risk option at 7.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWDL or QLD?

Over the 5-year period, QLD has performed better with a 21.41% return vs 14.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWDL or QLD?

IWDL and QLD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWDL or QLD?

QLD has the higher dividend yield at 0.13%, compared with 0.00% for IWDL.

What is the main difference between IWDL and QLD?

IWDL tracks Russell 1000 Value (200%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: UBS and ProShares.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.88), 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.