MAGX vs. QTJL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MAGX (Roundhill Daily 2X Long Magnificent Seven ETF) and QTJL (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MAGX returned 50.73% vs 20.52% for QTJL. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MAGX charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QTJL.

Performance

MAGX vs. QTJL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Daily 2X Long Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGX) 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, MAGX achieves a 1.49% return, which is significantly lower than QTJL's 7.15% return.

MAGX

• 1D: -2.59%
• 1M: 3.29%
• YTD: 1.49%
• 6M: 0.41%
• 1Y: 50.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QTJL

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 1.20%
• YTD: 7.15%
• 6M: 7.91%
• 1Y: 20.52%
• 3Y*: 19.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MAGX vs. QTJL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MAGX Roundhill Daily 2X Long Magnificent Seven ETF	1.49%	26.16%	81.14%
QTJL Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July	7.15%	21.07%	11.59%

Correlation

The correlation between MAGX and QTJL is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2024	0.82

The correlation between MAGX and QTJL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

MAGX vs. QTJL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MAGX	QTJL
Financial Services	25.0%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.2%
Communication Services	-	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.6%
Energy	-	0.6%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	54.2%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

MAGX vs. QTJL — Risk / Return Rank

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

MAGX

MAGX Risk / Return Rank: 31
MAGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
MAGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
MAGX Omega Ratio Rank: 32
MAGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
MAGX Martin Ratio Rank: 29

QTJL

QTJL Risk / Return Rank: 68
QTJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
QTJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
QTJL Omega Ratio Rank: 70
QTJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
QTJL Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

MAGX vs. QTJL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Daily 2X Long Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGX) 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.

	MAGX	QTJL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	2.06	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.79	2.93	-1.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.42	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.37	3.08	-1.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.21	16.23	-12.02
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MAGX vs. QTJL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAGX Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is lower than the QTJL Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAGX 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

	MAGX	QTJL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.28	2.06	-0.78
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	0.52	+0.33

Drawdowns

MAGX vs. QTJL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAGX drawdown since its inception was -54.19%, which is greater than QTJL's maximum drawdown of -33.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGX and QTJL.

Drawdown Indicators

	MAGX	QTJL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.19%	-33.40%	-20.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-37.24%	-6.68%	-30.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.43%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.49%	-0.01%	-7.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.78%	-7.94%	-5.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.09%	1.27%	+10.82%

Volatility

MAGX vs. QTJL - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Daily 2X Long Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGX) has a higher volatility of 9.19% compared to Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL) at 0.31%. This indicates that MAGX'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

	MAGX	QTJL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.19%	0.31%	+8.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.81%	7.61%	+21.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.88%	10.01%	+29.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	53.52%	20.42%	+33.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	53.52%	20.42%	+33.10%

MAGX vs. QTJL - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

MAGX vs. QTJL - Dividend Comparison

MAGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.02%, while QTJL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
MAGX Roundhill Daily 2X Long Magnificent Seven ETF	2.02%	2.05%	0.86%
QTJL Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MAGX and QTJL in my portfolio?

MAGX and QTJL have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MAGX or QTJL?

MAGX has higher volatility (9.19%) compared to QTJL (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGX dropped -54.19% vs QTJL's -33.40%.

Which ETF is better, MAGX or QTJL?

On 1-year performance, MAGX leads with 50.73% vs 20.52% for QTJL. On fees, QTJL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTJL has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MAGX or QTJL?

Over the 1-year period, MAGX has performed better with a 50.73% return vs 20.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MAGX or QTJL?

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

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

MAGX has the higher dividend yield at 2.02%, compared with 0.00% for QTJL.

What is the main difference between MAGX and QTJL?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTJL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.28), 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.