QCML vs. NIOG

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

QCML (GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF) and NIOG (Leverage Shares 2X Long NIO Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds - QCML tracks the Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM) while NIOG tracks the NIO Inc. (NIO). Both are passively managed. Their 0.03 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. QCML charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for NIOG.

Performance

QCML vs. NIOG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCML achieves a -42.41% return, which is significantly lower than NIOG's -27.56% return.

QCML

• 1D: -5.62%
• 1M: -31.62%
• 6M: -25.47%
• YTD: -42.41%
• 1Y: -27.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -39.56%

NIOG

• 1D: 2.78%
• 1M: 2.43%
• 6M: -13.06%
• YTD: -27.56%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
NIOG Leverage Shares 2X Long NIO Daily ETF	$119.34K	$154.91K	$404.59K
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	$8.37M	$13.54M	$57.95M

QCML vs. NIOG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	-42.41%	-1.76%
NIOG Leverage Shares 2X Long NIO Daily ETF	-27.56%	3.25%

Correlation

The correlation between QCML and NIOG is 0.03, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2025	0.03

Return for Risk

QCML vs. NIOG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QCML

QCML Risk / Return Rank: 9
QCML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
QCML Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
QCML Omega Ratio Rank: 14
QCML Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
QCML Martin Ratio Rank: 6

NIOG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QCML vs. NIOG - 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 NIO Daily ETF (NIOG). 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	NIOG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.27	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.30	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.41	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.83	—	—

Drawdowns

QCML vs. NIOG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCML drawdown since its inception was -68.76%, which is greater than NIOG's maximum drawdown of -61.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCML and NIOG.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCML	NIOG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.76%	-61.79%	-6.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-68.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-68.76%	-54.61%	-14.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.79%	-27.99%	-2.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	33.51%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QCML	NIOG	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%	109.44%	-4.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	99.78%	109.44%	-9.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	99.78%	109.44%	-9.66%

QCML vs. NIOG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCML has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than NIOG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCML vs. NIOG - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCML nor NIOG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCML and NIOG in my portfolio?

QCML and NIOG have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QCML or NIOG?

On fees, NIOG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCML or NIOG?

NIOG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for QCML.

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

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

What is the main difference between QCML and NIOG?

QCML tracks Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM), while NIOG tracks NIO Inc. (NIO). They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for QCML and 0.75% for NIOG.