PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QCML vs. AMDL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QCML vs. AMDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCML achieves a 37.20% return, which is significantly lower than AMDL's 386.95% return.


QCML

1D
-3.63%
1M
-18.23%
YTD
37.20%
6M
32.11%
1Y
61.74%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

AMDL

1D
5.43%
1M
30.82%
YTD
386.95%
6M
382.29%
1Y
978.63%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCML vs. AMDL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
QCML
GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF
37.20%-16.71%
AMDL
GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF
386.95%146.04%

Correlation

The correlation between QCML and AMDL is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025

0.50

The correlation between QCML and AMDL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.43 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

QCML vs. AMDL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QCML
AMDL

Technology

66.7%
66.6%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

QCML
66.7%
AMDL
66.6%

Basic Materials

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Communication Services

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Consumer Cyclical

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Consumer Defensive

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Energy

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Financial Services

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Healthcare

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Industrials

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Real Estate

QCML

-

AMDL

-

Utilities

QCML

-

AMDL

-

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

QCML vs. AMDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCML
QCML Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
QCML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCML Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCML Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
QCML Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCML Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

AMDL
AMDL Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
AMDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AMDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
AMDL Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
AMDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
AMDL Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QCML vs. AMDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). 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.


QCMLAMDLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-6.77

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.57

-0.35

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.06

17.62

-16.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.16

34.27

-32.11

QCML vs. AMDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCML Sharpe Ratio is 0.62, which is lower than the AMDL Sharpe Ratio of 7.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCML and AMDL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QCML vs. AMDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCML drawdown since its inception was -59.13%, smaller than the maximum AMDL drawdown of -88.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCML and AMDL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCMLAMDLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.13%

-88.63%

+29.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-58.72%

-56.13%

-2.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-25.58%

-1.66%

-23.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.94%

-47.80%

+18.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

28.67%

28.80%

-0.13%

Volatility

QCML vs. AMDL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) has a higher volatility of 55.13% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) at 46.96%. This indicates that QCML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AMDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCMLAMDLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

55.13%

46.96%

+8.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

86.76%

101.28%

-14.52%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

99.62%

134.09%

-34.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

98.92%

118.34%

-19.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

98.92%

118.34%

-19.42%

QCML vs. AMDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCML has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than AMDL's 1.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCML vs. AMDL - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCML nor AMDL has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


QCML and AMDL have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCML has higher volatility (55.13%) compared to AMDL (46.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCML dropped -59.13% vs AMDL's -88.63%.

On 1-year performance, AMDL leads with 978.63% vs 61.74% for QCML. On fees, AMDL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, AMDL has been the lower-risk option at 46.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AMDL has performed better with a 978.63% return vs 61.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AMDL is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for QCML.

QCML and AMDL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Their fees differ too: 1.50% for QCML and 1.15% for AMDL.

AMDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.39 vs 0.62), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QCML and AMDL

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