QGRW vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

QGRW (WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - QGRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Index, while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QGRW returned 26.27%/yr vs 44.57%/yr for QLD. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. QGRW charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

QGRW vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) 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, QGRW achieves a 10.35% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 32.65% return.

QGRW

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: -2.31%
• YTD: 10.35%
• 6M: 11.58%
• 1Y: 29.61%
• 3Y*: 26.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QLD

• 1D: 1.30%
• 1M: -0.55%
• YTD: 32.65%
• 6M: 32.82%
• 1Y: 73.89%
• 3Y*: 44.57%
• 5Y*: 23.24%
• 10Y*: 35.67%

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

QGRW vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund	10.35%	19.20%	34.85%	56.05%	-3.07%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	32.65%	30.36%	42.82%	117.72%	-13.76%

Correlation

The correlation between QGRW and QLD is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2022	0.98

The correlation between QGRW and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

QGRW vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QGRW	QLD
Technology	52.1%	53.8%
Communication Services	17.8%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	12.4%	12.3%
Industrials	8.0%	2.8%
Healthcare	4.3%	4.2%
Financial Services	4.1%	0.2%
Energy	0.6%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	0.5%	7.7%
Utilities	0.4%	1.4%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Real Estate	-	0.1%

Return for Risk

QGRW vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

QGRW

QGRW Risk / Return Rank: 47
QGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
QGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
QGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 48
QGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
QGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 47

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 64
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 64
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

QGRW vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) 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.

	QGRW	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	2.04	-0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.06	2.48	-0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.33	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.80	2.78	-0.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.86	9.46	-2.60

QGRW vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QGRW Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is comparable to the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QGRW 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

QGRW vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QGRW drawdown since its inception was -24.40%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QGRW and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	QGRW	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.40%	-83.13%	+58.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.44%	-25.13%	+9.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.40%	-42.29%	+17.89%
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	-5.67%	-7.11%	+1.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.27%	-18.16%	+14.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.04%	7.36%	-3.32%

Volatility

QGRW vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) is 7.09%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 15.14%. This indicates that QGRW 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

	QGRW	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.09%	15.14%	-8.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.83%	27.51%	-12.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.25%	34.29%	-16.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.20%	45.07%	-23.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.20%	44.73%	-23.53%

QGRW vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

QGRW has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

QGRW vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

QGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%, less than QLD's 0.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund	0.08%	0.09%	0.14%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.13%	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 QGRW and QLD in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, QGRW 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, QGRW or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (15.14%) compared to QGRW (7.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QGRW dropped -24.40% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, QGRW or QLD?

On 3-year performance, QLD leads with 44.57% vs 26.27% for QGRW. On fees, QGRW is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QGRW has been the lower-risk option at 7.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QGRW or QLD?

Over the 3-year period, QLD has performed better with a 44.57% return vs 26.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QGRW or QLD?

QGRW is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.

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

QLD has the higher dividend yield at 0.13%, compared with 0.08% for QGRW.

What is the main difference between QGRW and QLD?

QGRW is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. QGRW tracks WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Index, while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for QGRW and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.52), 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.