TZA vs. QID
TZA (Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares) and QID (ProShares UltraShort QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds - TZA tracks the Russell 2000 Index (-300%) while QID tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, TZA returned -44.82%/yr vs -39.35%/yr for QID. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TZA charges 1.11%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QID.
Performance
TZA vs. QID - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TZA achieves a -47.59% return, which is significantly lower than QID's -27.87% return. Over the past 10 years, TZA has underperformed QID with an annualized return of -44.82%, while QID has yielded a comparatively higher -39.35% annualized return.
TZA
- 1D
- -2.03%
- 1M
- -9.56%
- YTD
- -47.59%
- 6M
- -43.28%
- 1Y
- -68.17%
- 3Y*
- -47.17%
- 5Y*
- -30.85%
- 10Y*
- -44.82%
QID
- 1D
- -1.58%
- 1M
- 2.22%
- YTD
- -27.87%
- 6M
- -25.43%
- 1Y
- -42.86%
- 3Y*
- -37.79%
- 5Y*
- -30.50%
- 10Y*
- -39.35%
TZA vs. QID - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares | -47.59% | -40.22% | -32.22% | -41.19% | 30.21% | -50.80% | -80.43% | -53.25% | 25.06% | -38.19% |
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ | -27.87% | -34.97% | -34.06% | -57.19% | 66.30% | -44.93% | -69.71% | -49.57% | -9.90% | -44.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between TZA and QID 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 | 0.66 |
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 TZA and QID has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
TZA vs. QID — Risk / Return Rank
TZA
QID
TZA vs. QID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA) and ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID). 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.
| TZA | QID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.03 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.77 | 0.79 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -1.02 | -0.94 | -0.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.65 | -1.93 | +0.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TZA vs. QID - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TZA drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, roughly equal to the maximum QID drawdown of -99.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TZA and QID.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TZA | QID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -100.00% | -99.99% | -0.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -66.73% | -45.68% | -21.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -89.31% | -79.50% | -9.81% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -91.59% | -88.72% | -2.87% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.72% | -99.34% | -0.38% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -100.00% | -99.99% | -0.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -97.99% | -87.02% | -10.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 43.63% | 23.45% | +20.18% |
Volatility
TZA vs. QID - Volatility Comparison
Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares (TZA) has a higher volatility of 18.54% compared to ProShares UltraShort QQQ (QID) at 17.59%. This indicates that TZA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QID based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TZA | QID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 18.54% | 17.59% | +0.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 42.79% | 28.86% | +13.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 58.52% | 35.72% | +22.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 67.65% | 45.36% | +22.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 68.96% | 44.77% | +24.19% |
TZA vs. QID - Expense Ratio Comparison
TZA has a 1.11% expense ratio, which is higher than QID's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
TZA vs. QID - Dividend Comparison
TZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.06%, less than QID's 6.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QID ProShares UltraShort QQQ | 6.37% | 6.25% | 7.99% | 5.63% | 0.15% | 0.00% | 0.92% | 2.54% | 1.38% | 0.08% |
TZA Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X Shares | 5.06% | 5.08% | 5.40% | 5.49% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.21% | 1.56% | 0.63% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TZA and QID 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.
TZA has higher volatility (18.54%) compared to QID (17.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TZA dropped -100.00% vs QID's -99.99%.
On 10-year performance, QID leads with -39.35% vs -44.82% for TZA. On fees, QID is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, QID has been the lower-risk option at 17.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, QID has performed better with a -39.35% return vs -44.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QID is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.11% for TZA.
QID has the higher dividend yield at 6.37%, compared with 5.06% for TZA.
TZA tracks Russell 2000 Index (-300%), while QID tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (-200%). They also come from different issuers: Direxion and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.11% for TZA and 0.95% for QID.
TZA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.17 vs -1.20), 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.
Find the right allocation for TZA and QID
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