QID vs. SHRT

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

QID (ProShares UltraShort QQQ) and SHRT (Gotham Short Strategies ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QID is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%), while SHRT is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by Gotham. QID is passively managed, while SHRT is actively managed. Over the past year, QID returned -37.01% vs -17.31% for SHRT. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QID charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.35%/yr for SHRT.

Performance

QID vs. SHRT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) and Gotham Short Strategies ETF (SHRT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QID achieves a -24.66% return, which is significantly lower than SHRT's -15.36% return.

QID

• 1D: 3.44%
• 1M: 7.92%
• 6M: -23.02%
• YTD: -24.66%
• 1Y: -37.01%
• 3Y*: -34.07%
• 5Y*: -29.22%
• 10Y*: -37.89%

SHRT

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: -0.84%
• 6M: -11.10%
• YTD: -15.36%
• 1Y: -17.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QID vs. SHRT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ	-24.66%	-34.97%	-34.06%	-18.62%
SHRT Gotham Short Strategies ETF	-15.36%	-0.91%	-1.44%	-5.51%

Correlation

The correlation between QID and SHRT is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2023	0.51

The correlation between QID and SHRT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

QID vs. SHRT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QID	SHRT
Financial Services	97.7%	3.0%
Basic Materials	-	18.1%
Communication Services	-	3.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.6%
Energy	-	8.7%
Healthcare	-	10.7%
Industrials	-	12.6%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	17.3%
Utilities	-	0.0%

Return for Risk

QID vs. SHRT — 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: 2
QID Omega Ratio Rank: 2
QID Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
QID Martin Ratio Rank: 0

SHRT

SHRT Risk / Return Rank: 1
SHRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
SHRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
SHRT Omega Ratio Rank: 1
SHRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
SHRT Martin Ratio Rank: 0

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. SHRT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) and Gotham Short Strategies ETF (SHRT). 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	SHRT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.99	-1.24	+0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.48	-1.81	+0.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.84	0.80	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.83	-0.82	-0.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.61	-1.85	+0.25

QID vs. SHRT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QID Sharpe Ratio is -0.99, which is comparable to the SHRT Sharpe Ratio of -1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QID and SHRT, 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. SHRT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QID drawdown since its inception was -99.99%, which is greater than SHRT's maximum drawdown of -27.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QID and SHRT.

Drawdown Indicators

	QID	SHRT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.99%	-27.84%	-72.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-44.65%	-21.19%	-23.46%
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	-99.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.99%	-24.09%	-75.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-87.06%	-8.83%	-78.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	23.08%	9.53%	+13.55%

Volatility

QID vs. SHRT - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) has a higher volatility of 15.04% compared to Gotham Short Strategies ETF (SHRT) at 5.37%. This indicates that QID's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SHRT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QID	SHRT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.04%	5.37%	+9.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	30.91%	11.94%	+18.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.38%	14.02%	+23.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	45.63%	12.97%	+32.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	44.85%	12.97%	+31.88%

QID vs. SHRT - Expense Ratio Comparison

QID has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than SHRT's 1.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

QID vs. SHRT - Dividend Comparison

QID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.82%, more than SHRT's 0.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ	7.82%	6.25%	7.99%	5.63%	0.15%	0.00%	0.92%	2.54%	1.38%	0.08%
SHRT Gotham Short Strategies ETF	0.08%	0.07%	0.85%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QID and SHRT in my portfolio?

QID and SHRT have a correlation of 0.47, 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 SHRT?

QID has higher volatility (15.04%) compared to SHRT (5.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QID dropped -99.99% vs SHRT's -27.84%.

Which ETF is better, QID or SHRT?

On 1-year performance, SHRT leads with -17.31% vs -37.01% for QID. On fees, QID is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, SHRT has been the lower-risk option at 5.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QID or SHRT?

Over the 1-year period, SHRT has performed better with a -17.31% return vs -37.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QID or SHRT?

QID is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for SHRT.

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

QID has the higher dividend yield at 7.82%, compared with 0.08% for SHRT.

What is the main difference between QID and SHRT?

QID is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while SHRT is Inverse Equities. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Gotham. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QID and 1.35% for SHRT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.99 vs -1.24), 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.