QID vs. RWM
QID (ProShares UltraShort QQQ) and RWM (ProShares Short Russell2000) are both exchange-traded funds - QID is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%), while RWM is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QID returned -37.32%/yr vs -11.55%/yr for RWM. Their 0.76 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
QID vs. RWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QID achieves a -21.02% return, which is significantly lower than RWM's -14.68% return. Over the past 10 years, QID has underperformed RWM with an annualized return of -37.32%, while RWM has yielded a comparatively higher -11.55% annualized return.
QID
- 1D
- -1.22%
- 1M
- 6.86%
- 6M
- -19.38%
- YTD
- -21.02%
- 1Y
- -35.07%
- 3Y*
- -33.07%
- 5Y*
- -27.97%
- 10Y*
- -37.32%
- ALL TIME*
- -34.54%
RWM
- 1D
- 0.44%
- 1M
- 2.46%
- 6M
- -10.35%
- YTD
- -14.68%
- 1Y
- -24.96%
- 3Y*
- -10.10%
- 5Y*
- -5.74%
- 10Y*
- -11.55%
- ALL TIME*
- -11.99%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $255.66M | $222.38M | $304.58M | |
| $383.13M | $302.59M | $251.83M |
QID vs. RWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ | -21.02% | -34.97% | -34.06% | -57.19% | 66.30% | -44.93% | -69.71% | -49.57% | -9.90% | -44.00% |
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | -14.68% | -9.40% | -5.91% | -10.43% | 18.34% | -17.90% | -31.04% | -19.83% | 11.57% | -13.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between QID and RWM is 0.70, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.71 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.73 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.69 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2007 | 0.76 |
The correlation between QID and RWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.
QID vs. RWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QID
RWM
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
QID
RWM
Basic Materials
QID
-
RWM
-
Communication Services
QID
-
RWM
-
Consumer Cyclical
QID
-
RWM
-
Consumer Defensive
QID
-
RWM
-
Energy
QID
-
RWM
-
Healthcare
QID
-
RWM
-
Industrials
QID
-
RWM
-
Real Estate
QID
-
RWM
-
Technology
QID
-
RWM
-
Utilities
QID
-
RWM
-
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. RWM — Risk / Return Rank
QID
RWM
QID vs. RWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) and ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM). 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 | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.87 | 0.81 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.73 | -0.85 | +0.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.34 | -1.37 | +0.02 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QID vs. RWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QID drawdown since its inception was -99.99%, roughly equal to the maximum RWM drawdown of -95.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QID and RWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QID | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.99% | -95.61% | -4.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.65% | -27.57% | -17.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -79.50% | -43.12% | -36.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -88.72% | -43.12% | -45.60% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.21% | -72.51% | -26.70% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.99% | -95.45% | -4.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -87.09% | -74.20% | -12.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 24.20% | 17.16% | +7.04% |
Volatility
QID vs. RWM - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) has a higher volatility of 13.93% compared to ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM) at 3.70%. This indicates that QID's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QID | RWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.93% | 3.70% | +10.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 32.16% | 14.08% | +18.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 38.79% | 19.30% | +19.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 45.80% | 22.50% | +23.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.96% | 23.09% | +21.87% |
QID vs. RWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both QID and RWM have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
QID vs. RWM - Dividend Comparison
QID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.46%, more than RWM's 3.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ | 7.46% | 6.25% | 7.99% | 5.63% | 0.15% | 0.00% | 0.92% | 2.54% | 1.38% | 0.08% |
RWM ProShares Short Russell2000 | 3.74% | 3.97% | 6.03% | 4.78% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.20% | 1.55% | 0.87% | 0.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QID and RWM have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QID has higher volatility (13.93%) compared to RWM (3.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QID dropped -99.99% vs RWM's -95.61%.
On 10-year performance, RWM leads with -11.55% vs -37.32% for QID. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, RWM has been the lower-risk option at 3.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, RWM has performed better with a -11.55% return vs -37.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QID and RWM have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
QID has the higher dividend yield at 7.46%, compared with 3.74% for RWM.
QID is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while RWM is Inverse Equities. QID tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%), while RWM tracks Russell 2000 (-100%).
QID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.84 vs -1.22), 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.
Find the right allocation for QID and RWM
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