QID vs. QYLG

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

QID (ProShares UltraShort QQQ) and QYLG (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QID is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%), while QYLG is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite V2 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QID returned -28.81%/yr vs 11.52%/yr for QYLG. At a correlation of -0.96, they often move in opposite directions. QID charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLG.

Performance

QID vs. QYLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QID achieves a -22.40% return, which is significantly lower than QYLG's 10.52% return.

QID

• 1D: 2.99%
• 1M: 8.89%
• 6M: -20.92%
• YTD: -22.40%
• 1Y: -34.09%
• 3Y*: -33.06%
• 5Y*: -28.81%
• 10Y*: -37.75%

QYLG

• 1D: -1.28%
• 1M: -2.15%
• 6M: 9.20%
• YTD: 10.52%
• 1Y: 22.20%
• 3Y*: 17.51%
• 5Y*: 11.52%
• 10Y*: —

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

QID vs. QYLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ	-22.40%	-34.97%	-34.06%	-57.19%	66.30%	-44.93%	-31.07%
QYLG Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF	10.52%	15.29%	22.02%	38.73%	-26.27%	18.29%	13.88%

Correlation

The correlation between QID and QYLG is -0.98, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2020	-0.96

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

QID vs. QYLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QID	QYLG
Financial Services	97.7%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.0%
Communication Services	-	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.4%
Energy	-	0.5%
Healthcare	-	3.7%
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	58.7%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

QID vs. QYLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QID

QID Risk / Return Rank: 2
QID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
QID Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
QID Omega Ratio Rank: 3
QID Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
QID Martin Ratio Rank: 1

QYLG

QYLG Risk / Return Rank: 62
QYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
QYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
QYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 56
QYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
QYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

QID vs. QYLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG). 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	QYLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.91	1.54	-2.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.31	2.14	-3.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	1.28	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.77	2.65	-3.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.47	10.99	-12.46

QID vs. QYLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QID Sharpe Ratio is -0.91, which is lower than the QYLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QID and QYLG, 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

QID vs. QYLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QID drawdown since its inception was -99.99%, which is greater than QYLG's maximum drawdown of -29.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QID and QYLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	QID	QYLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.99%	-29.98%	-70.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-44.65%	-8.42%	-36.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-79.50%	-20.75%	-58.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-88.72%	-29.98%	-58.74%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-99.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.99%	-4.54%	-95.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-87.06%	-6.33%	-80.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	23.18%	2.03%	+21.15%

Volatility

QID vs. QYLG - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) has a higher volatility of 14.90% compared to Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG) at 6.34%. This indicates that QID's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QID	QYLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.90%	6.34%	+8.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	30.99%	12.40%	+18.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.51%	14.46%	+23.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	45.63%	18.31%	+27.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	44.86%	18.06%	+26.80%

QID vs. QYLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QID has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QYLG's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

QID vs. QYLG - Dividend Comparison

QID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.59%, less than QYLG's 16.97% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ	7.59%	6.25%	7.99%	5.63%	0.15%	0.00%	0.92%	2.54%	1.38%	0.08%
QYLG Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF	16.97%	17.93%	25.27%	5.43%	6.91%	10.15%	1.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QID and QYLG in my portfolio?

QID and QYLG have a correlation of -0.98, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QID or QYLG?

QID has higher volatility (14.90%) compared to QYLG (6.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QID dropped -99.99% vs QYLG's -29.98%.

Which ETF is better, QID or QYLG?

On 5-year performance, QYLG leads with 11.52% vs -28.81% for QID. On fees, QYLG is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QYLG has been the lower-risk option at 6.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QID or QYLG?

Over the 5-year period, QYLG has performed better with a 11.52% return vs -28.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QID or QYLG?

QYLG is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QID.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QID or QYLG?

QYLG has the higher dividend yield at 16.97%, compared with 7.59% for QID.

What is the main difference between QID and QYLG?

QID is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while QYLG is Nasdaq-100. QID tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%), while QYLG tracks CBOE Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite V2 Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QID and 0.60% for QYLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.54 vs -0.91), 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.