PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SMDV vs. QLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SMDV vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SMDV achieves a 17.34% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 28.12% return. Over the past 10 years, SMDV has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of 7.27%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 34.28% annualized return.


SMDV

1D
0.19%
1M
2.67%
6M
13.08%
YTD
17.34%
1Y
17.36%
3Y*
11.77%
5Y*
7.01%
10Y*
7.27%

QLD

1D
-3.81%
1M
-3.42%
6M
23.12%
YTD
28.12%
1Y
52.34%
3Y*
39.12%
5Y*
19.39%
10Y*
34.28%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SMDV vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SMDV
ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF
17.34%0.26%7.03%8.99%-5.90%18.98%-4.74%17.23%-0.58%4.63%
QLD
ProShares Ultra QQQ
28.12%30.36%42.82%117.72%-60.52%54.67%88.90%81.69%-8.31%70.34%

Correlation

The correlation between SMDV and QLD is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.24

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.36

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2015

0.45

Over the past year, the correlation between SMDV and QLD has dropped to 0.24 - well below their long-term average of 0.45, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

SMDV vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SMDV
QLD

Financial Services

32.8%
0.2%

Industrials

21.9%
2.6%

Utilities

15.7%
1.2%

Basic Materials

8.3%
1.0%

Real Estate

7.5%
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.4%
6.4%

Consumer Cyclical

4.1%
11.4%

Technology

2.5%
58.7%

Healthcare

1.6%
3.7%

Communication Services

1.1%
14.3%

Energy

-

0.5%

Financial Services

SMDV
32.8%
QLD
0.2%

Industrials

SMDV
21.9%
QLD
2.6%

Utilities

SMDV
15.7%
QLD
1.2%

Basic Materials

SMDV
8.3%
QLD
1.0%

Real Estate

SMDV
7.5%
QLD
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

SMDV
4.4%
QLD
6.4%

Consumer Cyclical

SMDV
4.1%
QLD
11.4%

Technology

SMDV
2.5%
QLD
58.7%

Healthcare

SMDV
1.6%
QLD
3.7%

Communication Services

SMDV
1.1%
QLD
14.3%

Energy

SMDV

-

QLD
0.5%

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

SMDV vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMDV
SMDV Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
SMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
SMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
SMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
SMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank

QLD
QLD Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SMDV vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) 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.


SMDVQLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.25

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.78

2.09

-0.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.50

6.85

-1.36

SMDV vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMDV Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is comparable to the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMDV and QLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

SMDV vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMDV drawdown since its inception was -34.12%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMDV and QLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SMDVQLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.12%

-83.13%

+49.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.79%

-25.13%

+15.34%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.23%

-42.29%

+21.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.23%

-63.68%

+42.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.12%

-63.68%

+29.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.24%

-10.29%

+9.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.89%

-18.11%

+12.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.17%

7.66%

-4.49%

Volatility

SMDV vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) is 3.78%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 17.17%. This indicates that SMDV 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


SMDVQLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.78%

17.17%

-13.39%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.51%

30.63%

-20.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.39%

37.07%

-21.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.57%

45.56%

-26.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.72%

44.86%

-24.14%

SMDV vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMDV has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

SMDV vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

SMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.30%, more than QLD's 0.13% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
SMDV
ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF
2.30%2.67%2.68%2.69%2.51%2.02%2.13%2.03%1.97%1.84%1.35%1.81%

Frequently Asked Questions


SMDV and QLD have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QLD has higher volatility (17.17%) compared to SMDV (3.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMDV dropped -34.12% vs QLD's -83.13%.

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 34.28% vs 7.27% for SMDV. On fees, SMDV is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, SMDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.78%. 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 34.28% return vs 7.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SMDV is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.

SMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.30%, compared with 0.13% for QLD.

SMDV is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. SMDV tracks Russell 2000 Dividend Growth Index, while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.40% for SMDV and 0.95% for QLD.

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.42 vs 1.13), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SMDV 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