QCML vs. MULL

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

QCML (GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF) and MULL (GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. QCML is passively managed, while MULL is actively managed. Over the past year, QCML returned 61.74% vs 4857.78% for MULL. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 1.50% expense ratio.

Performance

QCML vs. MULL - 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 MU Daily ETF (MULL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCML achieves a 37.20% return, which is significantly lower than MULL's 1,096.58% return.

QCML

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

MULL

• 1D: 14.08%
• 1M: 129.77%
• YTD: 1,096.58%
• 6M: 1,164.65%
• 1Y: 4,857.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QCML vs. MULL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	37.20%	-16.71%
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	1,096.58%	491.57%

Correlation

The correlation between QCML and MULL 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.44

QCML vs. MULL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QCML	MULL
Technology	66.7%	66.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

QCML vs. MULL — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCML

QCML Risk / Return Rank: 25
QCML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
QCML Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
QCML Omega Ratio Rank: 33
QCML Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
QCML Martin Ratio Rank: 19

MULL

MULL Risk / Return Rank: 98
MULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
MULL Omega Ratio Rank: 96
MULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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. MULL - 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 MU Daily ETF (MULL). 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	MULL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.62	34.53	-33.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.54	6.22	-4.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.78	-0.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.06	92.96	-91.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.16	298.64	-296.48

QCML vs. MULL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCML Sharpe Ratio is 0.62, which is lower than the MULL Sharpe Ratio of 34.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCML and MULL, 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

QCML vs. MULL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCML drawdown since its inception was -59.13%, smaller than the maximum MULL drawdown of -72.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCML and MULL.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCML	MULL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.13%	-72.29%	+13.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-58.72%	-53.09%	-5.63%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.58%	0.00%	-25.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.94%	-20.50%	-8.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	28.67%	16.49%	+12.18%

Volatility

QCML vs. MULL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) is 55.13%, while GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) has a volatility of 66.44%. This indicates that QCML experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MULL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCML	MULL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	55.13%	66.44%	-11.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	86.76%	116.36%	-29.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	99.62%	143.21%	-43.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	98.92%	140.95%	-42.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	98.92%	140.95%	-42.03%

QCML vs. MULL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QCML and MULL have an expense ratio of 1.50%.

Dividends

QCML vs. MULL - Dividend Comparison

QCML has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MULL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.03%.

Position	TTM	2025
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	0.03%	0.39%
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCML and MULL in my portfolio?

QCML and MULL 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, QCML or MULL?

MULL has higher volatility (66.44%) compared to QCML (55.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCML dropped -59.13% vs MULL's -72.29%.

Which ETF is better, QCML or MULL?

On 1-year performance, MULL leads with 4857.78% vs 61.74% for QCML. Both ETFs have the same 1.50% expense ratio. On volatility, QCML has been the lower-risk option at 55.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCML or MULL?

Over the 1-year period, MULL has performed better with a 4857.78% return vs 61.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCML or MULL?

QCML and MULL have the same expense ratio: 1.50% per year.

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

MULL has the higher dividend yield at 0.03%, compared with 0.00% for QCML.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (34.53 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.