MQQQ vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

MQQQ (Tradr 2X Long Triple Q Monthly ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%), from AXS and ProShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, MQQQ returned 83.05% vs 89.44% for QLD. With a 1.00 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. MQQQ charges 1.30%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

MQQQ vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tradr 2X Long Triple Q Monthly ETF (MQQQ) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MQQQ achieves a 39.32% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 42.81% return.

MQQQ

• 1D: 1.03%
• 1M: 20.59%
• YTD: 39.32%
• 6M: 35.46%
• 1Y: 83.05%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QLD

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: 21.71%
• YTD: 42.81%
• 6M: 38.79%
• 1Y: 89.44%
• 3Y*: 50.42%
• 5Y*: 26.76%
• 10Y*: 36.17%

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

MQQQ vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MQQQ Tradr 2X Long Triple Q Monthly ETF	39.32%	31.67%	19.72%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	42.81%	30.36%	19.57%

Correlation

The correlation between MQQQ and QLD is 1.00 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 4, 2024	1.00

The correlation between MQQQ and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 1.00 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MQQQ vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

MQQQ

MQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 68
MQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
MQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
MQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 65
MQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
MQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 66

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 73
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 70
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

MQQQ vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tradr 2X Long Triple Q Monthly ETF (MQQQ) 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.

	MQQQ	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.60	2.82	-0.23
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.07	3.26	-0.19
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.43	-0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.40	3.67	-0.28
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.24	12.83	-0.59
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MQQQ vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MQQQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.60, which is comparable to the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MQQQ 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MQQQ	QLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.60	2.82	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.60	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.81	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.33	0.60	+0.73

Drawdowns

MQQQ vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MQQQ drawdown since its inception was -42.16%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MQQQ and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	MQQQ	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.16%	-83.13%	+40.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.23%	-25.13%	-0.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-42.29%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-63.68%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.18%	-18.17%	+10.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.00%	7.20%	-0.20%

Volatility

MQQQ vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

Tradr 2X Long Triple Q Monthly ETF (MQQQ) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) have volatilities of 8.50% and 8.87%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MQQQ	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.50%	8.87%	-0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.50%	24.08%	+0.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.19%	31.86%	+0.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.26%	44.76%	-1.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	43.26%	44.57%	-1.31%

MQQQ vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

MQQQ has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

MQQQ vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

MQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%, more than QLD's 0.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MQQQ Tradr 2X Long Triple Q Monthly ETF	1.45%	2.02%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.12%	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 MQQQ and QLD in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 1.00, MQQQ and QLD move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, MQQQ or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (8.87%) compared to MQQQ (8.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MQQQ dropped -42.16% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, MQQQ or QLD?

On 1-year performance, QLD leads with 89.44% vs 83.05% for MQQQ. On fees, QLD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, MQQQ has been the lower-risk option at 8.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MQQQ or QLD?

Over the 1-year period, QLD has performed better with a 89.44% return vs 83.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MQQQ or QLD?

QLD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for MQQQ.

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

MQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.45%, compared with 0.12% for QLD.

What is the main difference between MQQQ and QLD?

Both ETFs track NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: AXS and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for MQQQ and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 2.60), 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.