SQQQ vs. COTG
SQQQ (ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ) and COTG (Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. SQQQ is passively managed, while COTG is actively managed. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SQQQ charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for COTG.
Performance
SQQQ vs. COTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SQQQ achieves a -42.24% return, which is significantly lower than COTG's 5.92% return.
SQQQ
- 1D
- -3.30%
- 1M
- -1.98%
- 6M
- -38.99%
- YTD
- -42.24%
- 1Y
- -57.13%
- 3Y*
- -52.32%
- 5Y*
- -46.24%
- 10Y*
- -55.43%
COTG
- 1D
- -0.98%
- 1M
- -13.10%
- 6M
- -10.61%
- YTD
- 5.92%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SQQQ vs. COTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
SQQQ ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ | -42.24% | -12.67% |
COTG Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF | 5.92% | -22.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between SQQQ and COTG is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2025 | 0.15 |
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
SQQQ vs. COTG — Risk / Return Rank
SQQQ
COTG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
SQQQ vs. COTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ (SQQQ) and Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF (COTG). 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.
| SQQQ | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.81 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.94 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.73 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SQQQ vs. COTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SQQQ drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, which is greater than COTG's maximum drawdown of -32.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SQQQ and COTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SQQQ | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -100.00% | -32.16% | -67.84% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -61.03% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -92.51% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -97.27% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.97% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -100.00% | -30.92% | -69.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -92.75% | -10.96% | -81.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 32.98% | — | — |
Volatility
SQQQ vs. COTG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SQQQ | COTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 24.18% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 45.91% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 55.61% | 40.85% | +14.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 67.89% | 40.85% | +27.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 66.57% | 40.85% | +25.72% |
SQQQ vs. COTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
SQQQ has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than COTG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
SQQQ vs. COTG - Dividend Comparison
SQQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.34%, while COTG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COTG Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SQQQ ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ | 10.34% | 9.36% | 10.23% | 8.01% | 0.28% | 0.00% | 2.15% | 2.92% | 1.47% | 0.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SQQQ and COTG have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, COTG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
COTG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SQQQ.
SQQQ has the higher dividend yield at 10.34%, compared with 0.00% for COTG.
They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for SQQQ and 0.75% for COTG.
Find the right allocation for SQQQ and COTG
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