SMDV vs. QLD

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

SMDV (ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - SMDV is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Dividend Growth Index, while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SMDV returned 7.53%/yr vs 32.56%/yr for QLD. Their 0.45 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. SMDV charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

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.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with SMDV having a 18.11% return and QLD slightly higher at 18.94%. Over the past 10 years, SMDV has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of 7.53%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 32.56% annualized return.

SMDV

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: 0.26%
• 6M: 10.74%
• YTD: 18.11%
• 1Y: 23.79%
• 3Y*: 10.63%
• 5Y*: 6.99%
• 10Y*: 7.53%
• ALL TIME*: 8.24%

QLD

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: -7.66%
• 6M: 16.78%
• YTD: 18.94%
• 1Y: 42.18%
• 3Y*: 35.01%
• 5Y*: 17.45%
• 10Y*: 32.56%
• ALL TIME*: 24.68%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	$408.78M	$399.91M	$439.78M
SMDV ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF	$4.61M	$5.90M	$3.47M

SMDV vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SMDV ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF	18.11%	0.26%	7.03%	8.99%	-5.90%	18.98%	-4.74%	17.23%	-0.58%	4.63%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	18.94%	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 0.21, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.21
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.45
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	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 0.21 - 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	31.5%	0.2%
Industrials	21.8%	2.7%
Utilities	17.3%	1.1%
Basic Materials	10.5%	1.0%
Real Estate	6.0%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	5.1%	10.7%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	6.3%
Healthcare	1.9%	3.6%
Communication Services	1.1%	13.1%
Technology	0.8%	60.9%
Energy	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

SMDV vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

SMDV

SMDV Risk / Return Rank: 64
SMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
SMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
SMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 61
SMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
SMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 61

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 39
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 38
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 41

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

	SMDV	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	0.95	+0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.30	1.44	+0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.18	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.30	1.46	+0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.27	4.32	+2.94

SMDV vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMDV Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is higher than the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMDV	QLD	Difference
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	-2.36%	-16.72%	+14.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.87%	-18.11%	+12.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.09%	8.47%	-5.38%

Volatility

SMDV vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) is 4.40%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 13.69%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	SMDV	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.40%	13.69%	-9.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.24%	31.99%	-21.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.45%	38.62%	-23.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.56%	45.76%	-27.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.75%	44.97%	-24.22%

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 2.29%, more than QLD's 0.14% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.14%	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	2.29%	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

Can I hold both SMDV and QLD in my portfolio?

SMDV and QLD have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SMDV or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (13.69%) compared to SMDV (4.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMDV dropped -34.12% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, SMDV or QLD?

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 32.56% vs 7.53% for SMDV. On fees, SMDV is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, SMDV has been the lower-risk option at 4.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMDV or QLD?

Over the 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 32.56% return vs 7.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMDV or QLD?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SMDV or QLD?

SMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.29%, compared with 0.14% for QLD.

What is the main difference between SMDV and 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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs 0.95), 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.