PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
QLD vs. EINC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

QLD vs. EINC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) and EINC (VanEck Energy Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%), while EINC is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS North America Energy Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QLD returned 36.27%/yr vs 12.03%/yr for EINC. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QLD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for EINC.

Performance

QLD vs. EINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) and VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QLD achieves a 29.58% return, which is significantly higher than EINC's 25.97% return. Over the past 10 years, QLD has outperformed EINC with an annualized return of 36.27%, while EINC has yielded a comparatively lower 12.03% annualized return.

QLD

1D
-6.61%
1M
-2.02%
YTD
29.58%
6M
26.13%
1Y
66.80%
3Y*
43.61%
5Y*
21.41%
10Y*
36.27%

EINC

1D
1.37%
1M
-4.50%
YTD
25.97%
6M
25.98%
1Y
29.82%
3Y*
30.36%
5Y*
21.18%
10Y*
12.03%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QLD vs. EINC - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QLD
ProShares Ultra QQQ		29.58%30.36%42.82%117.72%-60.52%54.67%88.90%81.69%-8.31%70.34%
EINC
VanEck Energy Income ETF		25.97%7.11%42.79%15.55%19.18%38.05%-19.89%16.98%-19.85%-3.45%

Correlation

The correlation between QLD and EINC is -0.15, 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

-0.15

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.14

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 13, 2012

0.31

The correlation between QLD and EINC shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to 0.31 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QLD vs. EINC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
QLD
EINC

Technology

58.7%

-

Communication Services

14.3%

-

Consumer Cyclical

11.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

6.4%

-

Healthcare

3.7%

-

Industrials

2.6%
2.5%

Utilities

1.2%
0.6%

Basic Materials

1.0%

-

Energy

0.5%
99.4%

Financial Services

0.2%

-

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Technology

QLD
58.7%
EINC

-

Communication Services

QLD
14.3%
EINC

-

Consumer Cyclical

QLD
11.4%
EINC

-

Consumer Defensive

QLD
6.4%
EINC

-

Healthcare

QLD
3.7%
EINC

-

Industrials

QLD
2.6%
EINC
2.5%

Utilities

QLD
1.2%
EINC
0.6%

Basic Materials

QLD
1.0%
EINC

-

Energy

QLD
0.5%
EINC
99.4%

Financial Services

QLD
0.2%
EINC

-

Real Estate

QLD
0.1%
EINC

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

ProShares Ultra QQQ

VanEck Energy Income ETF

Often compared with QLD:
QLD vs. QQQQLD vs. TQQQQLD vs. SSOQLD vs. QQQMQLD vs. UPROQLD vs. VOOQLD vs. SPY
Often compared with EINC:
EINC vs. XLEEINC vs. BIZDEINC vs. EMLPEINC vs. SMHEINC vs. IXCEINC vs. VPUEINC vs. ERY

Return for Risk

QLD vs. EINC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
QLD
QLD Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank
EINC
EINC Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
EINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
EINC Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
EINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
EINC Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QLD vs. EINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) and VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC). 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.

QLDEINCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.88
1.99

-0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.33
2.67

-0.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.35

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.67

3.80

-1.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.05

9.63

-0.58

QLD vs. EINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLD Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is comparable to the EINC Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLD and EINC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QLD vs. EINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLD drawdown since its inception was -83.13%, smaller than the maximum EINC drawdown of -87.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLD and EINC.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QLDEINCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-83.13%

-87.55%

+4.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-25.13%

-7.89%

-17.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-42.29%

-16.01%

-26.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-63.68%

-19.87%

-43.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.68%

-68.85%

+5.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.26%

-4.50%

-4.76%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.14%

-44.15%

+26.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.40%

3.10%

+4.30%

Volatility

QLD vs. EINC - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a higher volatility of 18.22% compared to VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) at 6.51%. This indicates that QLD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QLDEINCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

18.22%

6.51%

+11.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.95%

11.88%

+17.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

35.77%

15.10%

+20.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

45.34%

19.54%

+25.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

44.80%

25.43%

+19.37%

QLD vs. EINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than EINC's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

QLD vs. EINC - Dividend Comparison

QLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than EINC's 3.51% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EINC
VanEck Energy Income ETF		3.51%4.51%3.33%3.77%2.89%6.03%6.69%9.66%11.31%8.53%9.71%28.53%
QLD
ProShares Ultra QQQ		0.13%0.17%0.25%0.33%0.31%0.00%0.00%0.13%0.06%0.02%0.21%0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

QLD and EINC have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QLD has higher volatility (18.22%) compared to EINC (6.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLD dropped -83.13% vs EINC's -87.55%.

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 36.27% vs 12.03% for EINC. On fees, EINC is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, EINC has been the lower-risk option at 6.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 36.27% return vs 12.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EINC is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.

EINC has the higher dividend yield at 3.51%, compared with 0.13% for QLD.

QLD is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while EINC is Energy Equities. QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%), while EINC tracks MVIS North America Energy Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QLD and 0.45% for EINC.

EINC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 1.88), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QLD and EINC

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