LTL vs. OOQB
LTL (ProShares Ultra Telecommunications) and OOQB (Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LTL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Telecommunications Index (200%), while OOQB is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Volatility Shares. LTL is passively managed, while OOQB is actively managed. Over the past year, LTL returned 15.16% vs -27.35% for OOQB. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LTL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for OOQB.
Performance
LTL vs. OOQB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LTL achieves a -11.79% return, which is significantly higher than OOQB's -18.43% return.
LTL
- 1D
- -2.50%
- 1M
- -7.30%
- YTD
- -11.79%
- 6M
- -7.47%
- 1Y
- 15.16%
- 3Y*
- 36.33%
- 5Y*
- 16.49%
- 10Y*
- 9.43%
OOQB
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- -18.43%
- 6M
- -24.99%
- 1Y
- -27.35%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LTL vs. OOQB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LTL ProShares Ultra Telecommunications | -11.79% | 17.57% |
OOQB Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF | -18.43% | -13.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between LTL and OOQB is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025 | 0.47 |
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
LTL vs. OOQB — Risk / Return Rank
LTL
OOQB
LTL vs. OOQB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Telecommunications (LTL) and Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF (OOQB). 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.
| LTL | OOQB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 0.94 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.71 | -0.51 | +1.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.10 | -0.91 | +3.01 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LTL | OOQB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.57 | -0.53 | +1.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.48 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.26 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | -0.41 | +0.56 |
Drawdowns
LTL vs. OOQB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LTL drawdown since its inception was -80.20%, which is greater than OOQB's maximum drawdown of -53.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LTL and OOQB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LTL | OOQB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -80.20% | -53.44% | -26.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.43% | -53.44% | +32.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.37% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -52.60% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -64.15% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.89% | -43.69% | +28.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.66% | -23.26% | -5.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.25% | 30.11% | -22.86% |
Volatility
LTL vs. OOQB - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra Telecommunications (LTL) has a higher volatility of 7.57% compared to Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF (OOQB) at 0.00%. This indicates that LTL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OOQB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LTL | OOQB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.57% | 0.00% | +7.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.39% | 39.39% | -20.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.85% | 51.57% | -24.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.56% | 58.12% | -23.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.96% | 58.12% | -21.16% |
LTL vs. OOQB - Expense Ratio Comparison
LTL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than OOQB's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
LTL vs. OOQB - Dividend Comparison
LTL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, less than OOQB's 11.62% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LTL ProShares Ultra Telecommunications | 0.92% | 0.64% | 0.29% | 0.97% | 2.01% | 1.14% | 1.57% | 0.83% | 1.99% | 1.96% | 0.70% | 1.55% |
OOQB Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF | 11.62% | 9.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LTL and OOQB have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LTL has higher volatility (7.57%) compared to OOQB (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LTL dropped -80.20% vs OOQB's -53.44%.
On 1-year performance, LTL leads with 15.16% vs -27.35% for OOQB. On fees, OOQB is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, OOQB has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LTL has performed better with a 15.16% return vs -27.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
OOQB is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for LTL.
OOQB has the higher dividend yield at 11.62%, compared with 0.92% for LTL.
LTL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while OOQB is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Volatility Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for LTL and 0.75% for OOQB.
LTL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.57 vs -0.53), 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 LTL and OOQB
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