QCML vs. NVDL

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

QCML (GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF) and NVDL (GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. QCML is passively managed, while NVDL is actively managed. Over the past year, QCML returned 5.77% vs 29.82% for NVDL. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QCML charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for NVDL.

Performance

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCML achieves a -3.62% return, which is significantly lower than NVDL's 12.59% return.

QCML

• 1D: -2.33%
• 1M: -23.29%
• 6M: -10.47%
• YTD: -3.62%
• 1Y: 5.77%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NVDL

• 1D: 8.08%
• 1M: 3.77%
• 6M: 14.99%
• YTD: 12.59%
• 1Y: 29.82%
• 3Y*: 98.62%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QCML vs. NVDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	-3.62%	-16.71%
NVDL GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF	12.59%	52.00%

Correlation

The correlation between QCML and NVDL is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.37

The correlation between QCML and NVDL shifts across timeframes, from 0.24 (1 year) to 0.37 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QCML vs. NVDL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QCML	NVDL
Technology	66.6%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	0.0%
Communication Services	-	0.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.0%
Energy	-	0.0%
Financial Services	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	0.0%
Industrials	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	0.0%
Utilities	-	0.0%

Return for Risk

QCML vs. NVDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCML

QCML Risk / Return Rank: 14
QCML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
QCML Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
QCML Omega Ratio Rank: 20
QCML Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
QCML Martin Ratio Rank: 10

NVDL

NVDL Risk / Return Rank: 20
NVDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
NVDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
NVDL Omega Ratio Rank: 22
NVDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
NVDL Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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. NVDL - 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 NVDA Daily ETF (NVDL). 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	NVDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.04	0.44	-0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.84	1.09	-0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.13	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.07	0.74	-0.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.13	1.52	-1.39

QCML vs. NVDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCML Sharpe Ratio is 0.04, which is lower than the NVDL Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCML and NVDL, 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. NVDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCML drawdown since its inception was -59.13%, smaller than the maximum NVDL drawdown of -67.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCML and NVDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCML	NVDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.13%	-67.55%	+8.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-58.72%	-42.23%	-16.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-67.55%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-47.72%	-23.22%	-24.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.60%	-17.26%	-12.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.51%	20.42%	+10.09%

Volatility

QCML vs. NVDL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) has a higher volatility of 41.35% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF (NVDL) at 21.65%. This indicates that QCML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NVDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCML	NVDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	41.35%	21.65%	+19.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	91.73%	54.23%	+37.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	103.59%	70.71%	+32.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	100.33%	90.11%	+10.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	100.33%	90.11%	+10.22%

QCML vs. NVDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCML has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than NVDL's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCML vs. NVDL - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCML nor NVDL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
NVDL GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	11.29%
QCML GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCML and NVDL in my portfolio?

QCML and NVDL 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 NVDL?

QCML has higher volatility (41.35%) compared to NVDL (21.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCML dropped -59.13% vs NVDL's -67.55%.

Which ETF is better, QCML or NVDL?

On 1-year performance, NVDL leads with 29.82% vs 5.77% for QCML. On fees, NVDL is cheaper at 1.05% per year. On volatility, NVDL has been the lower-risk option at 21.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCML or NVDL?

Over the 1-year period, NVDL has performed better with a 29.82% return vs 5.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCML or NVDL?

NVDL is cheaper with a 1.05% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for QCML.

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

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

What is the main difference between QCML and NVDL?

Their fees differ too: 1.50% for QCML and 1.05% for NVDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NVDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.44 vs 0.04), 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.