WEBS vs. HQGO

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

WEBS (Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X Shares) and HQGO (Hartford US Quality Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - WEBS is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones Internet Composite Index (300%), while HQGO is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Hartford US Quality Growth Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, WEBS returned -16.44% vs 21.33% for HQGO. At a correlation of -0.84, they often move in opposite directions. WEBS charges 1.07%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for HQGO.

Performance

WEBS vs. HQGO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X Shares (WEBS) and Hartford US Quality Growth ETF (HQGO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WEBS achieves a -11.73% return, which is significantly lower than HQGO's 9.65% return.

WEBS

• 1D: 4.75%
• 1M: -3.57%
• 6M: -16.73%
• YTD: -11.73%
• 1Y: -16.44%
• 3Y*: -44.25%
• 5Y*: -33.85%
• 10Y*: —

HQGO

• 1D: -0.61%
• 1M: 0.81%
• 6M: 8.38%
• YTD: 9.65%
• 1Y: 21.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WEBS vs. HQGO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
WEBS Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X Shares	-11.73%	-40.66%	-56.62%	-20.02%
HQGO Hartford US Quality Growth ETF	9.65%	15.15%	25.09%	5.10%

Correlation

The correlation between WEBS and HQGO is -0.81, 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	-0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2023	-0.84

The correlation between WEBS and HQGO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.84 to -0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

WEBS vs. HQGO — Risk / Return Rank

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

WEBS

WEBS Risk / Return Rank: 7
WEBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
WEBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
WEBS Omega Ratio Rank: 8
WEBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
WEBS Martin Ratio Rank: 6

HQGO

HQGO Risk / Return Rank: 54
HQGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
HQGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
HQGO Omega Ratio Rank: 53
HQGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
HQGO Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

WEBS vs. HQGO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X Shares (WEBS) and Hartford US Quality Growth ETF (HQGO). 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.

	WEBS	HQGO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.27	1.53	-1.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.00	2.13	-2.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	1.27	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.31	2.06	-2.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.68	7.98	-8.67

WEBS vs. HQGO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WEBS Sharpe Ratio is -0.27, which is lower than the HQGO Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WEBS and HQGO, 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

WEBS vs. HQGO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WEBS drawdown since its inception was -99.63%, which is greater than HQGO's maximum drawdown of -20.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WEBS and HQGO.

Drawdown Indicators

	WEBS	HQGO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.63%	-20.85%	-78.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.54%	-10.40%	-43.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-90.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-97.09%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.57%	-1.31%	-98.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-91.18%	-2.52%	-88.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	24.10%	2.68%	+21.42%

Volatility

WEBS vs. HQGO - Volatility Comparison

Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X Shares (WEBS) has a higher volatility of 18.31% compared to Hartford US Quality Growth ETF (HQGO) at 3.67%. This indicates that WEBS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HQGO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WEBS	HQGO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	18.31%	3.67%	+14.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	47.79%	10.87%	+36.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	60.11%	13.98%	+46.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	82.26%	16.95%	+65.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	89.49%	16.95%	+72.54%

WEBS vs. HQGO - Expense Ratio Comparison

WEBS has a 1.07% expense ratio, which is higher than HQGO's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

WEBS vs. HQGO - Dividend Comparison

WEBS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.10%, more than HQGO's 0.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
HQGO Hartford US Quality Growth ETF	0.46%	0.51%	0.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WEBS Daily Dow Jones Internet Bear 3X Shares	3.10%	3.77%	8.02%	8.51%	0.20%	0.00%	1.11%	0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WEBS and HQGO in my portfolio?

WEBS and HQGO have a correlation of -0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WEBS or HQGO?

WEBS has higher volatility (18.31%) compared to HQGO (3.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WEBS dropped -99.63% vs HQGO's -20.85%.

Which ETF is better, WEBS or HQGO?

On 1-year performance, HQGO leads with 21.33% vs -16.44% for WEBS. On fees, HQGO is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, HQGO has been the lower-risk option at 3.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WEBS or HQGO?

Over the 1-year period, HQGO has performed better with a 21.33% return vs -16.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WEBS or HQGO?

HQGO is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 1.07% for WEBS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WEBS or HQGO?

WEBS has the higher dividend yield at 3.10%, compared with 0.46% for HQGO.

What is the main difference between WEBS and HQGO?

WEBS is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while HQGO is Large Cap Growth Equities. WEBS tracks Dow Jones Internet Composite Index (300%), while HQGO tracks Hartford US Quality Growth Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Hartford. Their fees differ too: 1.07% for WEBS and 0.34% for HQGO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HQGO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs -0.27), 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.