QULL vs. NEMG

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

QULL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN) and NEMG (Leverage Shares 2x Long NEM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. QULL is passively managed, while NEMG is actively managed. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QULL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for NEMG.

Performance

QULL vs. NEMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN (QULL) and Leverage Shares 2x Long NEM Daily ETF (NEMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QULL achieves a 12.33% return, which is significantly higher than NEMG's -24.50% return.

QULL

• 1D: -0.00%
• 1M: -2.49%
• YTD: 12.33%
• 6M: 9.57%
• 1Y: 34.72%
• 3Y*: 30.44%
• 5Y*: 14.85%
• 10Y*: —

NEMG

• 1D: 3.21%
• 1M: -29.04%
• YTD: -24.50%
• 6M: -31.89%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QULL vs. NEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QULL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Quality Factor TR ETN	12.33%	4.72%
NEMG Leverage Shares 2x Long NEM Daily ETF	-24.50%	22.87%

Correlation

The correlation between QULL and NEMG is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2025	0.49

Return for Risk

QULL vs. NEMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QULL

QULL Risk / Return Rank: 46
QULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
QULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
QULL Omega Ratio Rank: 42
QULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
QULL Martin Ratio Rank: 54

NEMG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

QULL vs. NEMG - 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 Leverage Shares 2x Long NEM Daily ETF (NEMG). 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.

	QULL	NEMG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.42	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.89	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.34	—	—

Drawdowns

QULL vs. NEMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QULL drawdown since its inception was -51.83%, smaller than the maximum NEMG drawdown of -57.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QULL and NEMG.

Drawdown Indicators

	QULL	NEMG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.83%	-57.56%	+5.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.43%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-36.82%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.83%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.14%	-55.82%	+50.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.92%	-23.65%	+9.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.17%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QULL	NEMG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.26%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.33%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.54%	102.58%	-78.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.66%	102.58%	-66.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.04%	102.58%	-67.54%

QULL vs. NEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QULL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NEMG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

QULL vs. NEMG - Dividend Comparison

Neither QULL nor NEMG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QULL and NEMG in my portfolio?

QULL and NEMG have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QULL or NEMG?

On fees, NEMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QULL or NEMG?

NEMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QULL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QULL or NEMG?

QULL and NEMG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QULL and NEMG?

They also come from different issuers: UBS and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QULL and 0.75% for NEMG.