RB vs. QLD
RB (ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - RB is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Russell 2000, while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RB charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.
Performance
RB vs. QLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RB achieves a 6.76% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 42.06% return.
RB
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.63%
- YTD
- 6.76%
- 6M
- 8.48%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
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%
RB vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 6.76% | 10.58% |
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ | 42.06% | 22.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between RB and QLD is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2025 | 0.50 |
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
RB vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank
RB
QLD
RB vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RB | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.70 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.58 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.81 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 3.15 | 0.60 | +2.55 |
Drawdowns
RB vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RB drawdown since its inception was -1.70%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RB and QLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RB | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.70% | -83.13% | +81.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -25.13% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -42.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -63.68% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -63.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.47% | -0.53% | +0.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.41% | -18.17% | +17.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 7.20% | — |
Volatility
RB vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RB | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.90% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 24.08% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.21% | 31.85% | -25.64% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.21% | 44.74% | -38.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.21% | 44.56% | -38.35% |
RB vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
RB has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
RB vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison
RB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.00%, more than QLD's 0.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 2.00% | 1.78% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RB and QLD have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.
RB has the higher dividend yield at 2.00%, compared with 0.12% for QLD.
RB is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. RB tracks Russell 2000, while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RB and 0.95% for QLD.
Find the right allocation for RB and QLD
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