QID vs. TZA
QID (ProShares UltraShort QQQ) and TZA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares) are both Leveraged Equities funds - QID tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%) while TZA tracks the Russell 2000 Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QID returned -38.34%/yr vs -42.83%/yr for TZA. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QID charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.11%/yr for TZA.
Performance
QID vs. TZA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QID achieves a -28.70% return, which is significantly higher than TZA's -45.82% return. Over the past 10 years, QID has outperformed TZA with an annualized return of -38.34%, while TZA has yielded a comparatively lower -42.83% annualized return.
QID
- 1D
- -0.64%
- 1M
- -0.57%
- 6M
- -25.87%
- YTD
- -28.70%
- 1Y
- -41.01%
- 3Y*
- -36.90%
- 5Y*
- -29.74%
- 10Y*
- -38.34%
TZA
- 1D
- 1.53%
- 1M
- -3.15%
- 6M
- -36.03%
- YTD
- -45.82%
- 1Y
- -62.34%
- 3Y*
- -43.90%
- 5Y*
- -31.29%
- 10Y*
- -42.83%
QID vs. TZA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ | -28.70% | -34.97% | -34.06% | -57.19% | 66.30% | -44.93% | -69.71% | -49.57% | -9.90% | -44.00% |
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares | -45.82% | -40.22% | -32.22% | -41.19% | 30.21% | -50.80% | -80.43% | -53.25% | 25.06% | -38.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between QID and TZA is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2008 | 0.75 |
The correlation between QID and TZA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. TZA — Risk / Return Rank
QID
TZA
QID vs. TZA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) and Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA). 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 | TZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.91 | -0.91 | -0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.81 | -1.40 | -0.41 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QID vs. TZA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QID drawdown since its inception was -99.99%, roughly equal to the maximum TZA drawdown of -100.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QID and TZA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QID | TZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.99% | -100.00% | +0.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -44.65% | -67.34% | +22.69% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -79.50% | -89.50% | +10.00% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -88.72% | -91.74% | +3.02% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.25% | -99.67% | +0.42% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.99% | -100.00% | +0.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -87.05% | -97.99% | +10.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 22.54% | 43.42% | -20.88% |
Volatility
QID vs. TZA - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) has a higher volatility of 17.52% compared to Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA) at 14.92%. This indicates that QID's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TZA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QID | TZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 17.52% | 14.92% | +2.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 30.45% | 42.52% | -12.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.93% | 58.14% | -21.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 45.55% | 67.55% | -22.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.81% | 68.79% | -23.98% |
QID vs. TZA - Expense Ratio Comparison
QID has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than TZA's 1.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
QID vs. TZA - Dividend Comparison
QID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.26%, more than TZA's 4.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ | 8.26% | 6.25% | 7.99% | 5.63% | 0.15% | 0.00% | 0.92% | 2.54% | 1.38% | 0.08% |
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares | 4.89% | 5.08% | 5.40% | 5.49% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.21% | 1.56% | 0.63% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QID and TZA have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QID has higher volatility (17.52%) compared to TZA (14.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QID dropped -99.99% vs TZA's -100.00%.
On 10-year performance, QID leads with -38.34% vs -42.83% for TZA. On fees, QID is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, TZA has been the lower-risk option at 14.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, QID has performed better with a -38.34% return vs -42.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QID is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.11% for TZA.
QID has the higher dividend yield at 8.26%, compared with 4.89% for TZA.
QID tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%), while TZA tracks Russell 2000 Index (-300%). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QID and 1.11% for TZA.
TZA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.05 vs -1.10), 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 TZA
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