TBF vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TBF (ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both exchange-traded funds - TBF is a Inverse Bonds fund tracking the U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Index (-100%), while QLD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, TBF returned 2.77%/yr vs 36.10%/yr for QLD. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TBF charges 0.94%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

TBF vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury (TBF) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TBF achieves a 2.38% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 42.06% return. Over the past 10 years, TBF has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of 2.77%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 36.10% annualized return.

TBF

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: -0.32%
• YTD: 2.38%
• 6M: 4.57%
• 1Y: 0.68%
• 3Y*: 7.99%
• 5Y*: 10.00%
• 10Y*: 2.77%

QLD

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: 21.54%
• YTD: 42.06%
• 6M: 37.45%
• 1Y: 85.49%
• 3Y*: 50.15%
• 5Y*: 25.75%
• 10Y*: 36.10%

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

TBF vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
TBF ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury	2.38%	1.27%	16.33%	2.43%	42.37%	1.33%	-19.35%	-10.96%	3.26%	-8.46%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	42.06%	30.36%	42.82%	117.72%	-60.52%	54.67%	88.90%	81.69%	-8.31%	70.34%

Correlation

The correlation between TBF and QLD is -0.16, 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	-0.16
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.13
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.07
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2009	0.19

The correlation between TBF and QLD shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.19 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

TBF vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TBF	QLD
Financial Services	48.6%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Communication Services	-	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.7%
Energy	-	0.6%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	53.8%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

TBF vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBF

TBF Risk / Return Rank: 9
TBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
TBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
TBF Omega Ratio Rank: 8
TBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
TBF Martin Ratio Rank: 10

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 69
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

TBF vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury (TBF) 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.

	TBF	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.07	2.70	-2.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.17	3.16	-2.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.41	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.10	3.42	-3.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.21	11.92	-11.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TBF vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TBF Sharpe Ratio is 0.07, which is lower than the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TBF 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TBF	QLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.07	2.70	-2.63
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64	0.58	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.19	0.81	-0.62
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.21	0.60	-0.81

Drawdowns

TBF vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBF drawdown since its inception was -70.40%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBF and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBF	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.40%	-83.13%	+12.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.23%	-25.13%	+17.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.79%	-42.29%	+24.50%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.79%	-63.68%	+45.89%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.39%	-63.68%	+25.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-43.40%	-0.53%	-42.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.43%	-18.17%	-29.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.27%	7.20%	-3.93%

Volatility

TBF vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury (TBF) is 2.80%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 8.90%. This indicates that TBF 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

	TBF	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.80%	8.90%	-6.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.42%	24.08%	-17.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.63%	31.85%	-22.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.72%	44.74%	-29.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.52%	44.56%	-30.04%

TBF vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBF has a 0.94% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBF vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

TBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.84%, more than QLD's 0.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.12%	0.17%	0.25%	0.33%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.13%	0.06%	0.02%	0.21%	0.11%
TBF ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury	2.84%	3.39%	4.06%	4.99%	0.36%	0.00%	0.22%	1.68%	0.88%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBF and QLD in my portfolio?

TBF and QLD have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TBF or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (8.90%) compared to TBF (2.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBF dropped -70.40% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, TBF or QLD?

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 36.10% vs 2.77% for TBF. On fees, TBF is cheaper at 0.94% per year. On volatility, TBF has been the lower-risk option at 2.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TBF or QLD?

Over the 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 36.10% return vs 2.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBF or QLD?

TBF is cheaper with a 0.94% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for QLD.

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

TBF has the higher dividend yield at 2.84%, compared with 0.12% for QLD.

What is the main difference between TBF and QLD?

TBF is categorized as Inverse Bonds, while QLD is Leveraged Equities. TBF tracks U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Index (-100%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.94% for TBF and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 0.07), 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.