QDTY vs. QLD

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

QDTY (YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - QDTY is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by YieldMax, while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). QDTY is actively managed, while QLD is passively managed. Over the past year, QDTY returned 22.67% vs 42.18% for QLD. Their correlation of 0.93 means they have usually moved in the same direction. QDTY charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

QDTY vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTY) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDTY achieves a 9.56% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 18.94% return.

QDTY

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: -0.96%
• 6M: 7.98%
• YTD: 9.56%
• 1Y: 22.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.20%

QLD

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: -7.66%
• 6M: 16.78%
• YTD: 18.94%
• 1Y: 42.18%
• 3Y*: 35.01%
• 5Y*: 17.45%
• 10Y*: 32.56%
• ALL TIME*: 24.68%

*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)
QDTY YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	$575.56K	$563.37K	$755.82K
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	$408.78M	$399.91M	$439.78M

QDTY vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QDTY YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	9.56%	12.21%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	18.94%	23.36%

Correlation

The correlation between QDTY and QLD is 0.94, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.93

The correlation between QDTY and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

QDTY vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QDTY	QLD
Technology	60.8%	60.9%
Communication Services	13.0%	13.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	10.7%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	6.3%
Healthcare	3.6%	3.6%
Industrials	2.9%	2.7%
Utilities	1.1%	1.1%
Basic Materials	1.0%	1.0%
Energy	0.5%	0.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

QDTY vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDTY

QDTY Risk / Return Rank: 46
QDTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
QDTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
QDTY Omega Ratio Rank: 43
QDTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
QDTY Martin Ratio Rank: 50

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 39
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 38
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

QDTY vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTY) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). 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.

	QDTY	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.11	0.95	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	1.44	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.18	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.84	1.46	+0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.79	4.32	+1.47

QDTY vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDTY Sharpe Ratio is 1.11, which is comparable to the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDTY and QLD, 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

QDTY vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDTY drawdown since its inception was -23.45%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDTY and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDTY	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.45%	-83.13%	+59.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.10%	-25.13%	+14.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-42.29%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-63.68%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.85%	-16.72%	+10.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.44%	-18.11%	+13.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.53%	8.47%	-4.94%

Volatility

QDTY vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTY) is 7.08%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 13.69%. This indicates that QDTY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDTY	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.08%	13.69%	-6.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.40%	31.99%	-16.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.49%	38.62%	-20.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.06%	45.76%	-19.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.06%	44.97%	-18.91%

QDTY vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDTY has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDTY vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

QDTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 35.74%, more than QLD's 0.14% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QDTY YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	35.74%	26.82%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.14%	0.17%	0.25%	0.33%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.13%	0.06%	0.02%	0.21%	0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDTY and QLD in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, QDTY and QLD move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, QDTY or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (13.69%) compared to QDTY (7.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDTY dropped -23.45% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, QDTY or QLD?

On 1-year performance, QLD leads with 42.18% vs 22.67% for QDTY. On fees, QLD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, QDTY has been the lower-risk option at 7.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QDTY or QLD?

Over the 1-year period, QLD has performed better with a 42.18% return vs 22.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDTY or QLD?

QLD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for QDTY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QDTY or QLD?

QDTY has the higher dividend yield at 35.74%, compared with 0.14% for QLD.

What is the main difference between QDTY and QLD?

QDTY is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for QDTY and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QDTY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.11 vs 0.95), 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.