PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QLD vs. NOBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QLD vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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 42.06% return, which is significantly higher than NOBL's 3.51% return. Over the past 10 years, QLD has outperformed NOBL with an annualized return of 36.10%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively lower 9.51% annualized return.


QLD

1D
-0.53%
1M
21.54%
YTD
42.06%
6M
37.45%
1Y
85.49%
3Y*
50.15%
5Y*
25.75%
10Y*
36.10%

NOBL

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.01%
YTD
3.51%
6M
3.45%
1Y
9.00%
3Y*
8.01%
5Y*
5.03%
10Y*
9.51%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QLD vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QLD
ProShares Ultra QQQ
42.06%30.36%42.82%117.72%-60.52%54.67%88.90%81.69%-8.31%70.34%
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
3.51%6.84%6.72%8.09%-6.52%25.46%8.35%27.39%-3.26%21.02%

Correlation

The correlation between QLD and NOBL is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.24

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

0.35

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

0.51

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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2013

0.60

Over the past year, the correlation between QLD and NOBL has dropped to 0.24 - well below their long-term average of 0.59, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

QLD vs. NOBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QLD
NOBL

Technology

53.8%
3.6%

Communication Services

15.8%

-

Consumer Cyclical

12.3%
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

7.7%
23.5%

Healthcare

4.2%
9.7%

Industrials

2.8%
20.3%

Utilities

1.4%
6.4%

Basic Materials

1.1%
10.9%

Energy

0.6%
3.4%

Financial Services

0.2%
12.4%

Real Estate

0.1%
4.6%

Technology

QLD
53.8%
NOBL
3.6%

Communication Services

QLD
15.8%
NOBL

-

Consumer Cyclical

QLD
12.3%
NOBL
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

QLD
7.7%
NOBL
23.5%

Healthcare

QLD
4.2%
NOBL
9.7%

Industrials

QLD
2.8%
NOBL
20.3%

Utilities

QLD
1.4%
NOBL
6.4%

Basic Materials

QLD
1.1%
NOBL
10.9%

Energy

QLD
0.6%
NOBL
3.4%

Financial Services

QLD
0.2%
NOBL
12.4%

Real Estate

QLD
0.1%
NOBL
4.6%

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

QLD vs. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

QLD
QLD Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

NOBL
NOBL Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
NOBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NOBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
NOBL Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
NOBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
NOBL Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
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. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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.


QLDNOBLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.90

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.14

+0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.42

0.99

+2.43

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.92

2.58

+9.34

QLD vs. NOBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLD Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is higher than the NOBL Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLD and NOBL, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QLDNOBLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.70

0.80

+1.90

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

0.35

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.81

0.57

+0.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

0.64

-0.05

Drawdowns

QLD vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLD drawdown since its inception was -83.13%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLD and NOBL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QLDNOBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-83.13%

-35.43%

-47.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-25.13%

-9.11%

-16.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-42.29%

-15.36%

-26.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-63.68%

-17.92%

-45.76%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.68%

-35.43%

-28.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.53%

-5.99%

+5.46%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.17%

-3.48%

-14.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.20%

3.50%

+3.70%

Volatility

QLD vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a higher volatility of 8.90% compared to ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) at 2.36%. This indicates that QLD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QLDNOBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.90%

2.36%

+6.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.08%

8.00%

+16.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.85%

11.33%

+20.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

44.74%

14.38%

+30.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

44.56%

16.60%

+27.96%

QLD vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

QLD vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison

QLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%, less than NOBL's 2.12% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
2.12%2.14%2.05%2.09%1.94%1.89%2.14%1.89%2.37%1.74%2.13%2.02%
QLD
ProShares Ultra QQQ
0.12%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 NOBL have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QLD has higher volatility (8.90%) compared to NOBL (2.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLD dropped -83.13% vs NOBL's -35.43%.

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 36.10% vs 9.51% for NOBL. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 2.36%. 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 36.10% return vs 9.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.

NOBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 0.12% for QLD.

QLD is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while NOBL is Dividend. QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%), while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QLD and 0.35% for NOBL.

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 0.80), 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 NOBL

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