PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SMN vs. QTJL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SMN vs. QTJL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials (SMN) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SMN achieves a -23.85% return, which is significantly lower than QTJL's 7.15% return.


SMN

1D
-0.81%
1M
-4.18%
YTD
-23.85%
6M
-27.24%
1Y
-28.88%
3Y*
-17.26%
5Y*
-14.35%
10Y*
-25.09%

QTJL

1D
-0.01%
1M
1.20%
YTD
7.15%
6M
7.91%
1Y
20.52%
3Y*
19.20%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SMN vs. QTJL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
SMN
ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials
-23.85%-17.96%7.37%-20.23%-3.03%-20.89%
QTJL
Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July
7.15%21.07%16.50%42.39%-30.16%9.32%

Correlation

The correlation between SMN and QTJL is -0.38, 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

-0.38

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

-0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2021

-0.55

The correlation between SMN and QTJL shifts across timeframes, from -0.55 (all time) to -0.38 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

SMN vs. QTJL — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMN
SMN Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
SMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
SMN Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
SMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
SMN Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

QTJL
QTJL Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
QTJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QTJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
QTJL Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
QTJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
QTJL Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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.

SMN vs. QTJL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials (SMN) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL). 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.


SMNQTJLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.92

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.87

1.42

-0.54

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.75

3.08

-3.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.36

16.23

-17.59

SMN vs. QTJL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMN Sharpe Ratio is -0.86, which is lower than the QTJL Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMN and QTJL, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


SMNQTJLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.86

2.06

-2.92

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.59

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.54

0.52

-1.06

Drawdowns

SMN vs. QTJL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMN drawdown since its inception was -99.92%, which is greater than QTJL's maximum drawdown of -33.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMN and QTJL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SMNQTJLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-99.92%

-33.40%

-66.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-38.52%

-6.68%

-31.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-53.71%

-22.43%

-31.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-66.05%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-95.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-99.91%

-0.01%

-99.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-90.55%

-7.94%

-82.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

21.25%

1.27%

+19.98%

Volatility

SMN vs. QTJL - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials (SMN) has a higher volatility of 11.58% compared to Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL) at 0.31%. This indicates that SMN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QTJL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SMNQTJLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.58%

0.31%

+11.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.63%

7.61%

+19.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

33.89%

10.01%

+23.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.54%

20.42%

+19.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

42.90%

20.42%

+22.48%

SMN vs. QTJL - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMN has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QTJL's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

SMN vs. QTJL - Dividend Comparison

SMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.62%, while QTJL has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
QTJL
Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SMN
ProShares UltraShort Basic Materials
4.62%4.08%5.02%4.54%0.42%0.00%0.00%0.72%0.06%

Frequently Asked Questions


SMN and QTJL have a correlation of -0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SMN has higher volatility (11.58%) compared to QTJL (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMN dropped -99.92% vs QTJL's -33.40%.

On 3-year performance, QTJL leads with 19.20% vs -17.26% for SMN. On fees, QTJL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTJL has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, QTJL has performed better with a 19.20% return vs -17.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QTJL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SMN.

SMN has the higher dividend yield at 4.62%, compared with 0.00% for QTJL.

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for SMN and 0.79% for QTJL.

QTJL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs -0.86), 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 SMN and QTJL

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