MULL vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MULL (GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds. MULL is actively managed, while QLD is passively managed. Over the past year, MULL returned 6074.28% vs 85.49% for QLD. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MULL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

MULL vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) 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, MULL achieves a 936.86% return, which is significantly higher than QLD's 42.06% return.

MULL

• 1D: 2.92%
• 1M: 216.81%
• YTD: 936.86%
• 6M: 1,369.93%
• 1Y: 6,074.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QLD

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: 21.54%
• YTD: 42.06%
• 6M: 37.45%
• 1Y: 85.49%
• 3Y*: 50.15%
• 5Y*: 25.75%
• 10Y*: 36.10%

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

MULL vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	936.86%	558.51%	-40.10%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	42.06%	30.36%	-1.61%

Correlation

The correlation between MULL and QLD is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2024	0.62

The correlation between MULL and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

MULL vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MULL	QLD
Technology	66.7%	53.8%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Communication Services	-	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.7%
Energy	-	0.6%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

MULL vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

MULL

MULL Risk / Return Rank: 99
MULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
MULL Omega Ratio Rank: 97
MULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 69
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

MULL vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) 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.

	MULL	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	46.71	2.70	+44.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.02	3.16	+3.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.89	1.41	+0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	116.34	3.42	+112.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	390.40	11.92	+378.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MULL vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MULL Sharpe Ratio is 46.71, which is higher than the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MULL 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

	MULL	QLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	46.71	2.70	+44.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.58	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.81	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	7.45	0.60	+6.85

Drawdowns

MULL vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MULL drawdown since its inception was -72.29%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MULL and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	MULL	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.29%	-83.13%	+10.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.09%	-25.13%	-27.96%
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%	-0.53%	+0.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.62%	-18.17%	-2.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.79%	7.20%	+8.59%

Volatility

MULL vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) has a higher volatility of 55.41% compared to ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) at 8.90%. This indicates that MULL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MULL	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	55.41%	8.90%	+46.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	105.59%	24.08%	+81.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	132.38%	31.85%	+100.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	136.22%	44.74%	+91.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	136.22%	44.56%	+91.66%

MULL vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

MULL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

MULL vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

MULL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than QLD's 0.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	0.04%	0.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.12%	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 MULL and QLD in my portfolio?

MULL and QLD have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MULL or QLD?

MULL has higher volatility (55.41%) compared to QLD (8.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MULL dropped -72.29% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, MULL or QLD?

On 1-year performance, MULL leads with 6074.28% vs 85.49% for QLD. On fees, QLD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, QLD has been the lower-risk option at 8.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MULL or QLD?

Over the 1-year period, MULL has performed better with a 6074.28% return vs 85.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MULL or QLD?

QLD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MULL.

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

QLD has the higher dividend yield at 0.12%, compared with 0.04% for MULL.

What is the main difference between MULL and QLD?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for MULL and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (46.71 vs 2.70), 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.