PAWZ vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 17, 2026

PAWZ (ProShares Pet Care ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - PAWZ is a Global Equities fund tracking the FactSet Pet Care Index, while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PAWZ returned -9.14%/yr vs 23.20%/yr for QLD. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PAWZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

PAWZ vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) 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, PAWZ achieves a -11.47% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 35.61% return.

PAWZ

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 4.84%
• YTD: -11.47%
• 6M: -11.85%
• 1Y: -15.91%
• 3Y*: -1.31%
• 5Y*: -9.14%
• 10Y*: —

QLD

• 1D: -3.75%
• 1M: 4.87%
• YTD: 35.61%
• 6M: 36.64%
• 1Y: 73.00%
• 3Y*: 44.47%
• 5Y*: 23.20%
• 10Y*: 36.29%

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

PAWZ vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF	-11.47%	1.21%	3.88%	12.47%	-40.08%	10.46%	61.69%	22.95%	-8.52%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	35.61%	30.36%	42.82%	117.72%	-60.52%	54.67%	88.90%	81.69%	-18.06%

Correlation

The correlation between PAWZ and QLD is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2018	0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between PAWZ and QLD has dropped to 0.36 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

PAWZ vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PAWZ	QLD
Healthcare	32.6%	3.7%
Consumer Defensive	16.3%	6.4%
Consumer Cyclical	12.5%	11.4%
Basic Materials	5.0%	1.0%
Technology	4.2%	58.7%
Financial Services	4.1%	0.2%
Communication Services	-	14.3%
Energy	-	0.5%
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

PAWZ vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAWZ

PAWZ Risk / Return Rank: 2
PAWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
PAWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 0

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 59
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 58
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

PAWZ vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) 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.

	PAWZ	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.97	2.11	-3.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.34	2.56	-3.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.34	-0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.75	2.92	-3.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.77	9.94	-11.72

PAWZ vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAWZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.97, which is lower than the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAWZ 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

PAWZ vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAWZ drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAWZ and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAWZ	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.07%	-83.13%	+33.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.26%	-25.13%	+3.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.12%	-42.29%	+19.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.07%	-63.68%	+13.61%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.10%	-5.04%	-36.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.64%	-18.15%	-4.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.99%	7.37%	+1.62%

Volatility

PAWZ vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) is 3.76%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 16.41%. This indicates that PAWZ 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

	PAWZ	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.76%	16.41%	-12.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.44%	28.09%	-16.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.53%	34.93%	-18.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.19%	45.19%	-25.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.64%	44.80%	-23.16%

PAWZ vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAWZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAWZ vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

PAWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.86%, more than QLD's 0.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF	0.86%	0.81%	0.63%	0.44%	0.54%	0.18%	0.14%	0.35%	0.07%	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 PAWZ and QLD in my portfolio?

PAWZ and QLD have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PAWZ or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (16.41%) compared to PAWZ (3.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAWZ dropped -50.07% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, PAWZ or QLD?

On 5-year performance, QLD leads with 23.20% vs -9.14% for PAWZ. On fees, PAWZ is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PAWZ has been the lower-risk option at 3.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAWZ or QLD?

Over the 5-year period, QLD has performed better with a 23.20% return vs -9.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAWZ or QLD?

PAWZ is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.

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

PAWZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.86%, compared with 0.12% for QLD.

What is the main difference between PAWZ and QLD?

PAWZ is categorized as Global Equities, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. PAWZ tracks FactSet Pet Care Index, while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PAWZ and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs -0.97), 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.