QULL vs. CEFD
QULL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN) and CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - QULL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Sector Neutral Quality Index, while CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QULL returned 16.15%/yr vs 3.13%/yr for CEFD. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
QULL vs. CEFD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QULL achieves a 14.81% return, which is significantly higher than CEFD's 6.26% return.
QULL
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 8.71%
- YTD
- 14.81%
- 6M
- 14.51%
- 1Y
- 38.22%
- 3Y*
- 32.28%
- 5Y*
- 16.15%
- 10Y*
- —
CEFD
- 1D
- -0.98%
- 1M
- 2.61%
- YTD
- 6.26%
- 6M
- 6.56%
- 1Y
- 18.31%
- 3Y*
- 15.60%
- 5Y*
- 3.13%
- 10Y*
- —
QULL vs. CEFD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QULL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN | 14.81% | 17.61% | 38.03% | 57.07% | -42.00% | 51.36% |
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 6.26% | 14.15% | 20.06% | 8.36% | -28.93% | 18.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between QULL and CEFD is 0.71, 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 | 0.72 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021 | 0.76 |
The correlation between QULL and CEFD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.76 - 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
QULL vs. CEFD — Risk / Return Rank
QULL
CEFD
QULL vs. CEFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD). 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.
| QULL | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.14 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.29 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.08 | 1.47 | +0.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.22 | 6.84 | +2.38 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QULL | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.57 | 1.43 | +0.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 | 0.18 | +0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.55 | 0.52 | +0.04 |
Drawdowns
QULL vs. CEFD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QULL drawdown since its inception was -51.83%, which is greater than CEFD's maximum drawdown of -36.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QULL and CEFD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QULL | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.83% | -36.95% | -14.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.43% | -12.51% | -5.92% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -36.82% | -21.76% | -15.06% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -51.83% | -36.95% | -14.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.38% | -1.14% | +0.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.06% | -11.72% | -2.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.15% | 2.68% | +1.47% |
Volatility
QULL vs. CEFD - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL) has a higher volatility of 4.68% compared to ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) at 4.05%. This indicates that QULL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEFD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QULL | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.68% | 4.05% | +0.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.79% | 11.27% | +7.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.46% | 12.86% | +11.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.62% | 17.93% | +17.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.15% | 17.31% | +17.84% |
QULL vs. CEFD - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both QULL and CEFD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
QULL vs. CEFD - Dividend Comparison
QULL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 14.58% | 14.88% | 13.90% | 14.76% | 16.56% | 10.31% | 5.37% |
QULL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QULL and CEFD have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QULL has higher volatility (4.68%) compared to CEFD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QULL dropped -51.83% vs CEFD's -36.95%.
On 5-year performance, QULL leads with 16.15% vs 3.13% for CEFD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, CEFD has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QULL has performed better with a 16.15% return vs 3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QULL and CEFD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for QULL.
QULL tracks MSCI USA Sector Neutral Quality Index, while CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%).
QULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 1.43), 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 QULL and CEFD
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