TNA vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

TNA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds - TNA tracks the Russell 2000 Index (300%) while QLD tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, TNA returned 8.78%/yr vs 35.67%/yr for QLD. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TNA charges 1.14%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

TNA vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) 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, TNA achieves a 53.14% return, which is significantly higher than QLD's 32.65% return. Over the past 10 years, TNA has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of 8.78%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 35.67% annualized return.

TNA

• 1D: 2.53%
• 1M: 15.26%
• YTD: 53.14%
• 6M: 40.13%
• 1Y: 130.01%
• 3Y*: 25.74%
• 5Y*: -6.50%
• 10Y*: 8.78%

QLD

• 1D: 1.30%
• 1M: 2.58%
• YTD: 32.65%
• 6M: 32.82%
• 1Y: 73.89%
• 3Y*: 44.57%
• 5Y*: 23.24%
• 10Y*: 35.67%

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

TNA vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
TNA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares	53.14%	9.82%	7.21%	26.24%	-62.48%	27.88%	-7.82%	71.88%	-39.89%	39.15%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	32.65%	30.36%	42.82%	117.72%	-60.52%	54.67%	88.90%	81.69%	-8.31%	70.34%

Correlation

The correlation between TNA and QLD is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2008	0.75

The correlation between TNA and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

TNA vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TNA	QLD
Technology	19.1%	58.7%
Industrials	18.0%	2.6%
Healthcare	16.3%	3.7%
Financial Services	15.3%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	11.4%
Real Estate	5.9%	0.1%
Energy	5.4%	0.5%
Basic Materials	4.7%	1.0%
Utilities	2.7%	1.2%
Communication Services	2.4%	14.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	6.4%

Return for Risk

TNA vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

TNA

TNA Risk / Return Rank: 68
TNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
TNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
TNA Omega Ratio Rank: 54
TNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
TNA Martin Ratio Rank: 73

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 64
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 64
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

TNA vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) 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.

	TNA	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	2.04	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	2.48	0.00
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.33	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.63	2.78	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.92	9.46	+2.45

TNA vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TNA Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is comparable to the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TNA 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

TNA vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TNA drawdown since its inception was -88.09%, which is greater than QLD's maximum drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TNA and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	TNA	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.09%	-83.13%	-4.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.53%	-25.13%	-7.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-65.78%	-42.29%	-23.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-82.36%	-63.68%	-18.68%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-88.09%	-63.68%	-24.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-35.23%	-7.11%	-28.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.92%	-18.16%	-15.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.91%	7.36%	+2.55%

Volatility

TNA vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares (TNA) has a higher volatility of 21.54% compared to ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) at 15.14%. This indicates that TNA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TNA	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	21.54%	15.14%	+6.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	42.61%	27.51%	+15.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	58.70%	34.29%	+24.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	67.57%	45.07%	+22.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	68.54%	44.73%	+23.81%

TNA vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

TNA has a 1.14% expense ratio, which is higher than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

TNA vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

TNA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, more than QLD's 0.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
TNA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bull 3X Shares	0.39%	0.78%	0.93%	1.27%	0.31%	0.06%	0.03%	0.44%	0.36%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TNA and QLD in my portfolio?

TNA and QLD have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TNA or QLD?

TNA has higher volatility (21.54%) compared to QLD (15.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TNA dropped -88.09% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, TNA or QLD?

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 35.67% vs 8.78% for TNA. On fees, QLD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, QLD has been the lower-risk option at 15.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TNA or QLD?

Over the 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 35.67% return vs 8.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TNA or QLD?

QLD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.14% for TNA.

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

TNA has the higher dividend yield at 0.39%, compared with 0.13% for QLD.

What is the main difference between TNA and QLD?

TNA tracks Russell 2000 Index (300%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Direxion and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.14% for TNA and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 2.01), 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.