SEF vs. QLD
SEF (ProShares Short Financials) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - SEF is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Financials Index (-100%), while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SEF returned -12.50%/yr vs 36.15%/yr for QLD. At a correlation of -0.65, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
SEF vs. QLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SEF achieves a 2.28% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 28.38% return. Over the past 10 years, SEF has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of -12.50%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 36.15% annualized return.
SEF
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- -4.01%
- YTD
- 2.28%
- 6M
- 4.12%
- 1Y
- -1.58%
- 3Y*
- -12.24%
- 5Y*
- -6.67%
- 10Y*
- -12.50%
QLD
- 1D
- -0.93%
- 1M
- -2.93%
- YTD
- 28.38%
- 6M
- 24.28%
- 1Y
- 60.38%
- 3Y*
- 43.16%
- 5Y*
- 21.23%
- 10Y*
- 36.15%
SEF vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SEF ProShares Short Financials | 2.28% | -9.82% | -17.81% | -8.81% | 11.85% | -27.02% | -16.93% | -23.51% | 10.34% | -17.12% |
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ | 28.38% | 30.36% | 42.82% | 117.72% | -60.52% | 54.67% | 88.90% | 81.69% | -8.31% | 70.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between SEF and QLD is -0.36, 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 | -0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.58 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2008 | -0.65 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between SEF and QLD has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.65 to -0.36, meaning they move in opposite directions less often than they have historically.
SEF vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SEF
QLD
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
SEF
QLD
Basic Materials
SEF
-
QLD
Communication Services
SEF
-
QLD
Consumer Cyclical
SEF
-
QLD
Consumer Defensive
SEF
-
QLD
Energy
SEF
-
QLD
Healthcare
SEF
-
QLD
Industrials
SEF
-
QLD
Real Estate
SEF
-
QLD
Technology
SEF
-
QLD
Utilities
SEF
-
QLD
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
SEF vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank
SEF
QLD
SEF vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Financials (SEF) 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.
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.
| SEF | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 1.29 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.14 | 2.41 | -2.56 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.33 | 8.15 | -8.48 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SEF vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SEF drawdown since its inception was -96.51%, which is greater than QLD's maximum drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SEF and QLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SEF | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -96.51% | -83.13% | -13.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.14% | -25.13% | +13.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -39.40% | -42.29% | +2.89% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -41.62% | -63.68% | +22.06% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -75.66% | -63.68% | -11.98% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -96.33% | -10.11% | -86.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -82.74% | -18.14% | -64.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.76% | 7.43% | -2.67% |
Volatility
SEF vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares Short Financials (SEF) is 4.05%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 18.22%. This indicates that SEF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SEF | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.05% | 18.22% | -14.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.16% | 28.88% | -17.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.46% | 35.74% | -21.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.97% | 45.34% | -27.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.48% | 44.79% | -24.31% |
SEF vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both SEF and QLD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
SEF vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison
SEF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.56%, more than QLD's 0.13% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SEF ProShares Short Financials | 3.56% | 4.33% | 5.72% | 4.43% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.12% | 1.25% | 0.41% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SEF and QLD have a correlation of -0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QLD has higher volatility (18.22%) compared to SEF (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SEF dropped -96.51% vs QLD's -83.13%.
On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 36.15% vs -12.50% for SEF. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, SEF 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 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 36.15% return vs -12.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SEF and QLD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
SEF has the higher dividend yield at 3.56%, compared with 0.13% for QLD.
SEF is categorized as Inverse Equities, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. SEF tracks Dow Jones U.S. Financials Index (-100%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%).
QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs -0.11), 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 SEF 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