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

Performance

QLD vs. RSPG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with QLD having a 32.65% return and RSPG slightly lower at 31.50%. Over the past 10 years, QLD has outperformed RSPG with an annualized return of 35.67%, while RSPG has yielded a comparatively lower 9.46% annualized return.


QLD

1D
1.30%
1M
-0.55%
YTD
32.65%
6M
32.82%
1Y
73.89%
3Y*
44.57%
5Y*
23.24%
10Y*
35.67%

RSPG

1D
0.93%
1M
-1.22%
YTD
31.50%
6M
28.78%
1Y
37.06%
3Y*
18.49%
5Y*
20.90%
10Y*
9.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QLD vs. RSPG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QLD
ProShares Ultra QQQ
32.65%30.36%42.82%117.72%-60.52%54.67%88.90%81.69%-8.31%70.34%
RSPG
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF
31.50%7.01%6.09%4.49%57.97%57.73%-32.44%13.38%-24.68%-6.39%

Correlation

The correlation between QLD and RSPG is -0.11, 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

-0.11

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

0.11

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

0.21

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

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2006

0.41

The correlation between QLD and RSPG shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.41 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QLD vs. RSPG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QLD
RSPG

Technology

58.7%

-

Communication Services

14.3%

-

Consumer Cyclical

11.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

6.4%

-

Healthcare

3.7%

-

Industrials

2.6%

-

Utilities

1.2%

-

Basic Materials

1.0%

-

Energy

0.5%
100.0%

Financial Services

0.2%
0.0%

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Technology

QLD
58.7%
RSPG

-

Communication Services

QLD
14.3%
RSPG

-

Consumer Cyclical

QLD
11.4%
RSPG

-

Consumer Defensive

QLD
6.4%
RSPG

-

Healthcare

QLD
3.7%
RSPG

-

Industrials

QLD
2.6%
RSPG

-

Utilities

QLD
1.2%
RSPG

-

Basic Materials

QLD
1.0%
RSPG

-

Energy

QLD
0.5%
RSPG
100.0%

Financial Services

QLD
0.2%
RSPG
0.0%

Real Estate

QLD
0.1%
RSPG

-

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. RSPG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QLD
QLD Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

RSPG
RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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. RSPG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG). 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.


QLDRSPGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.30

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.78

3.30

-0.52

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.46

9.35

+0.12

QLD vs. RSPG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLD Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the RSPG Sharpe Ratio of 1.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLD and RSPG, 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. RSPG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLD drawdown since its inception was -83.13%, roughly equal to the maximum RSPG drawdown of -79.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLD and RSPG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QLDRSPGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-83.13%

-79.98%

-3.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-25.13%

-12.18%

-12.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-42.29%

-23.06%

-19.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-63.68%

-28.44%

-35.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.68%

-73.17%

+9.49%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.11%

-7.62%

+0.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.16%

-25.44%

+7.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.36%

4.29%

+3.07%

Volatility

QLD vs. RSPG - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a higher volatility of 15.14% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG) at 7.06%. This indicates that QLD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSPG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QLDRSPGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.14%

7.06%

+8.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

27.51%

17.00%

+10.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

34.29%

21.79%

+12.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

45.07%

28.36%

+16.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

44.73%

33.54%

+11.19%

QLD vs. RSPG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than RSPG's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

QLD vs. RSPG - Dividend Comparison

QLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than RSPG's 1.99% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
RSPG
Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF
1.99%2.60%2.43%2.84%3.43%2.37%3.15%2.15%2.18%2.55%1.14%2.80%

Frequently Asked Questions


QLD and RSPG have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QLD has higher volatility (15.14%) compared to RSPG (7.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLD dropped -83.13% vs RSPG's -79.98%.

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 35.67% vs 9.46% for RSPG. On fees, RSPG is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, RSPG has been the lower-risk option at 7.06%. 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 35.67% return vs 9.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RSPG is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.

RSPG has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 0.13% for QLD.

QLD is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while RSPG is Energy Equities. QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%), while RSPG tracks S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QLD and 0.40% for RSPG.

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.84), 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 RSPG

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