QCML vs. BMNG
QCML (GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF) and BMNG (Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. QCML is passively managed, while BMNG is actively managed. Their 0.36 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. QCML charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for BMNG.
Performance
QCML vs. BMNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QCML achieves a -42.41% return, which is significantly higher than BMNG's -78.09% return.
QCML
- 1D
- -5.62%
- 1M
- -31.62%
- 6M
- -25.47%
- YTD
- -42.41%
- 1Y
- -27.37%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -39.56%
BMNG
- 1D
- -9.09%
- 1M
- 32.74%
- 6M
- -71.67%
- YTD
- -78.09%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $9.15M | $12.05M | $13.09M | |
| $8.37M | $13.54M | $57.95M |
QCML vs. BMNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF | -42.41% | -0.56% |
BMNG Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF | -78.09% | -80.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between QCML and BMNG is 0.36, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2025 | 0.36 |
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. BMNG — Risk / Return Rank
QCML
BMNG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
QCML vs. BMNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) and Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF (BMNG). 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.
| QCML | BMNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.41 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.83 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QCML vs. BMNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QCML drawdown since its inception was -68.76%, smaller than the maximum BMNG drawdown of -97.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCML and BMNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QCML | BMNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -68.76% | -97.32% | +28.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -68.76% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -68.76% | -95.92% | +27.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.79% | -84.08% | +53.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 33.51% | — | — |
Volatility
QCML vs. BMNG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QCML | BMNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 24.96% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 92.90% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 105.25% | 187.45% | -82.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 99.78% | 187.45% | -87.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 99.78% | 187.45% | -87.67% |
QCML vs. BMNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
QCML has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BMNG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
QCML vs. BMNG - Dividend Comparison
Neither QCML nor BMNG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
QCML and BMNG 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.
On fees, BMNG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BMNG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for QCML.
QCML and BMNG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for QCML and 0.75% for BMNG.
Find the right allocation for QCML and BMNG
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