QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO
QQI.TO (BetaPro Nasdaq-100 Daily Inverse ETF) and CASH.TO (Global X High Interest Savings ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQI.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (-100%), while CASH.TO is a Money Market fund actively managed by Global X. QQI.TO is passively managed, while CASH.TO is actively managed. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QQI.TO charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for CASH.TO.
Performance
QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QQI.TO achieves a -16.04% return, which is significantly lower than CASH.TO's 1.00% return.
QQI.TO
- 1D
- -2.02%
- 1M
- -0.31%
- YTD
- -16.04%
- 6M
- -16.04%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CASH.TO
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- YTD
- 1.00%
- 6M
- 1.01%
- 1Y
- 2.18%
- 3Y*
- 3.53%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QQI.TO BetaPro Nasdaq-100 Daily Inverse ETF | -16.04% | -3.15% |
CASH.TO Global X High Interest Savings ETF | 1.00% | 0.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between QQI.TO and CASH.TO is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2025 | 0.04 |
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
QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO — Risk / Return Rank
QQI.TO
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CASH.TO
QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BetaPro Nasdaq-100 Daily Inverse ETF (QQI.TO) and Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.TO). 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.
| QQI.TO | CASH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 6.54 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 109.63 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 368.50 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QQI.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.23%, which is greater than CASH.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQI.TO and CASH.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QQI.TO | CASH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.23% | -0.80% | -24.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.02% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.06% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.72% | -0.00% | -24.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.42% | -0.00% | -8.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.01% | — |
Volatility
QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QQI.TO | CASH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.06% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.15% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.26% | 0.24% | +20.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.26% | 0.61% | +19.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.26% | 0.61% | +19.65% |
QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
QQI.TO has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than CASH.TO's 0.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
QQI.TO vs. CASH.TO - Dividend Comparison
QQI.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CASH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CASH.TO Global X High Interest Savings ETF | 2.12% | 2.53% | 4.37% | 5.05% | 2.30% | 0.10% |
QQI.TO BetaPro Nasdaq-100 Daily Inverse ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QQI.TO and CASH.TO have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CASH.TO is cheaper at 0.11% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CASH.TO is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for QQI.TO.
QQI.TO is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while CASH.TO is Money Market. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for QQI.TO and 0.11% for CASH.TO.
Find the right allocation for QQI.TO and CASH.TO
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