PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QCML vs. VRTL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCML achieves a 79.80% return, which is significantly lower than VRTL's 230.54% return.


QCML

1D
7.29%
1M
100.00%
YTD
79.80%
6M
72.23%
1Y
120.00%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

VRTL

1D
-1.32%
1M
-3.10%
YTD
230.54%
6M
160.92%
1Y
442.54%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCML vs. VRTL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
QCML
GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF
79.80%-2.29%
VRTL
GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF
230.54%108.44%

Correlation

The correlation between QCML and VRTL is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2025

0.34

QCML vs. VRTL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QCML
VRTL

Technology

66.7%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

66.7%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

QCML
66.7%
VRTL

-

Basic Materials

QCML

-

VRTL

-

Communication Services

QCML

-

VRTL

-

Consumer Cyclical

QCML

-

VRTL

-

Consumer Defensive

QCML

-

VRTL

-

Energy

QCML

-

VRTL

-

Financial Services

QCML

-

VRTL

-

Healthcare

QCML

-

VRTL

-

Industrials

QCML

-

VRTL
66.7%

Real Estate

QCML

-

VRTL

-

Utilities

QCML

-

VRTL

-

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. VRTL — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCML
QCML Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
QCML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCML Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCML Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
QCML Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCML Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

VRTL
VRTL Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
VRTL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VRTL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
VRTL Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
VRTL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
VRTL Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank
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. VRTL - 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 VRT Daily ETF (VRTL). 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.


QCMLVRTLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.61

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.43

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.06

9.40

-7.35

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.31

24.03

-19.72

QCML vs. VRTL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCML Sharpe Ratio is 1.30, which is lower than the VRTL Sharpe Ratio of 3.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCML and VRTL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QCMLVRTLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.30

3.91

-2.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

3.29

-2.91

Drawdowns

QCML vs. VRTL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCML drawdown since its inception was -59.13%, roughly equal to the maximum VRTL drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCML and VRTL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCMLVRTLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.13%

-60.58%

+1.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-58.72%

-47.45%

-11.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.47%

-24.11%

+21.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.03%

-15.16%

-13.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

27.93%

18.53%

+9.40%

Volatility

QCML vs. VRTL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) has a higher volatility of 57.39% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF (VRTL) at 33.79%. This indicates that QCML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VRTL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCMLVRTLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

57.39%

33.79%

+23.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

78.26%

87.48%

-9.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

93.04%

114.32%

-21.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

95.49%

124.39%

-28.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

95.49%

124.39%

-28.90%

QCML vs. VRTL - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

QCML vs. VRTL - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCML nor VRTL has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


QCML and VRTL have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCML has higher volatility (57.39%) compared to VRTL (33.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCML dropped -59.13% vs VRTL's -60.58%.

On 1-year performance, VRTL leads with 442.54% vs 120.00% for QCML. Both ETFs have the same 1.50% expense ratio. On volatility, VRTL has been the lower-risk option at 33.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, VRTL has performed better with a 442.54% return vs 120.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

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

VRTL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.91 vs 1.30), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QCML and VRTL

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