QID vs. BEG
QID (ProShares UltraShort QQQ) and BEG (Leverage Shares 2X Long BE Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. QID is passively managed, while BEG is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.43, they often move in opposite directions. QID charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for BEG.
Performance
QID vs. BEG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QID achieves a -31.93% return, which is significantly lower than BEG's 778.97% return.
QID
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- -6.88%
- YTD
- -31.93%
- 6M
- -30.64%
- 1Y
- -49.05%
- 3Y*
- -38.43%
- 5Y*
- -31.45%
- 10Y*
- -39.47%
BEG
- 1D
- 10.53%
- 1M
- 20.45%
- YTD
- 778.97%
- 6M
- 676.57%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QID vs. BEG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ | -31.93% | -1.24% |
BEG Leverage Shares 2X Long BE Daily ETF | 778.97% | 1.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between QID and BEG is -0.43, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2025 | -0.43 |
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
QID vs. BEG — Risk / Return Rank
QID
BEG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
QID vs. BEG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) and Leverage Shares 2X Long BE Daily ETF (BEG). 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.
| QID | BEG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.75 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -1.01 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.94 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QID vs. BEG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QID drawdown since its inception was -99.99%, which is greater than BEG's maximum drawdown of -59.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QID and BEG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QID | BEG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.99% | -59.85% | -40.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -48.52% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -79.50% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -88.72% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.37% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.99% | 0.00% | -99.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -87.02% | -16.76% | -70.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 26.66% | — | — |
Volatility
QID vs. BEG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QID | BEG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.52% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.23% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 35.23% | 212.53% | -177.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 45.26% | 212.53% | -167.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.81% | 212.53% | -167.72% |
QID vs. BEG - Expense Ratio Comparison
QID has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BEG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
QID vs. BEG - Dividend Comparison
QID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.63%, while BEG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BEG Leverage Shares 2X Long BE Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ | 7.63% | 6.25% | 7.99% | 5.63% | 0.15% | 0.00% | 0.92% | 2.54% | 1.38% | 0.08% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QID and BEG have a correlation of -0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BEG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BEG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QID.
QID has the higher dividend yield at 7.63%, compared with 0.00% for BEG.
They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QID and 0.75% for BEG.
Find the right allocation for QID and BEG
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