QCML vs. NVD

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

QCML (GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF) and NVD (GraniteShares 2x Short NVDA Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QCML is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM), while NVD is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares. QCML is passively managed, while NVD is actively managed. Over the past year, QCML returned -23.46% vs -48.83% for NVD. Their -0.36 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. Both charge a 1.50% expense ratio.

Performance

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCML achieves a -39.31% return, which is significantly lower than NVD's -34.27% return.

QCML

• 1D: 5.38%
• 1M: -27.94%
• 6M: -22.50%
• YTD: -39.31%
• 1Y: -23.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -37.18%

NVD

• 1D: -5.81%
• 1M: -14.55%
• 6M: -34.17%
• YTD: -34.27%
• 1Y: -48.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -78.82%

*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)
NVD GraniteShares 2x Short NVDA Daily ETF	$439.12M	$390.53M	$343.34M
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	$8.59M	$11.94M	$57.53M

QCML vs. NVD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	-39.31%	-16.71%
NVD GraniteShares 2x Short NVDA Daily ETF	-34.27%	-69.89%

Correlation

The correlation between QCML and NVD is -0.24, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	-0.36

The correlation between QCML and NVD shifts across timeframes, from -0.36 (all time) to -0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QCML vs. NVD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QCML	NVD
Technology	66.7%	200.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

QCML vs. NVD — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCML

QCML Risk / Return Rank: 10
QCML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
QCML Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
QCML Omega Ratio Rank: 14
QCML Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
QCML Martin Ratio Rank: 6

NVD

NVD Risk / Return Rank: 3
NVD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
NVD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
NVD Omega Ratio Rank: 4
NVD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
NVD Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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. NVD - 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 Short NVDA Daily ETF (NVD). 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	NVD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.23	-0.67	+0.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.39	-0.76	+1.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	0.92	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.34	-0.82	+0.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.70	-1.46	+0.77

QCML vs. NVD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCML Sharpe Ratio is -0.23, which is higher than the NVD Sharpe Ratio of -0.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCML and NVD, 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. NVD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCML drawdown since its inception was -68.76%, smaller than the maximum NVD drawdown of -99.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCML and NVD.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCML	NVD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.76%	-99.26%	+30.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-68.76%	-59.80%	-8.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-67.08%	-99.11%	+32.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.89%	-82.51%	+51.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	33.77%	33.42%	+0.35%

Volatility

QCML vs. NVD - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) and GraniteShares 2x Short NVDA Daily ETF (NVD) have volatilities of 25.51% and 24.57%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCML	NVD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	25.51%	24.57%	+0.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	93.06%	57.71%	+35.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	104.72%	73.34%	+31.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	99.74%	92.04%	+7.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	99.74%	92.04%	+7.70%

QCML vs. NVD - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

QCML vs. NVD - Dividend Comparison

QCML has not paid dividends to shareholders, while NVD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 17.99%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
NVD GraniteShares 2x Short NVDA Daily ETF	17.99%	11.83%	8.68%	15.78%
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCML and NVD in my portfolio?

QCML and NVD have a correlation of -0.24, 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 NVD?

QCML has higher volatility (25.51%) compared to NVD (24.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCML dropped -68.76% vs NVD's -99.26%.

Which ETF is better, QCML or NVD?

On 1-year performance, QCML leads with -23.46% vs -48.83% for NVD. Both ETFs have the same 1.50% expense ratio. On volatility, NVD has been the lower-risk option at 24.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCML or NVD?

Over the 1-year period, QCML has performed better with a -23.46% return vs -48.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCML or NVD?

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

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

NVD has the higher dividend yield at 17.99%, compared with 0.00% for QCML.

What is the main difference between QCML and NVD?

QCML is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while NVD is Inverse Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.23 vs -0.67), 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.