XPP vs. QLD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XPP (ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds from ProShares - XPP tracks the FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%) while QLD tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XPP returned -6.09%/yr vs 36.27%/yr for QLD. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

XPP vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) 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, XPP achieves a -28.87% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 29.58% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of -6.09%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 36.27% annualized return.

XPP

• 1D: -3.49%
• 1M: -13.68%
• YTD: -28.87%
• 6M: -29.70%
• 1Y: -21.92%
• 3Y*: 3.54%
• 5Y*: -22.11%
• 10Y*: -6.09%

QLD

• 1D: -6.61%
• 1M: -2.02%
• YTD: 29.58%
• 6M: 26.13%
• 1Y: 66.80%
• 3Y*: 43.61%
• 5Y*: 21.41%
• 10Y*: 36.27%

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

XPP vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	-28.87%	45.84%	38.18%	-34.77%	-50.06%	-40.45%	7.07%	24.88%	-31.36%	80.21%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	29.58%	30.36%	42.82%	117.72%	-60.52%	54.67%	88.90%	81.69%	-8.31%	70.34%

Correlation

The correlation between XPP and QLD is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.36
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.40
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2009	0.54

The correlation between XPP and QLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (3 years) to 0.54 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XPP vs. QLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XPP	QLD
Financial Services	48.1%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.0%
Communication Services	-	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.4%
Energy	-	0.5%
Healthcare	-	3.7%
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	58.7%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

XPP vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

XPP

XPP Risk / Return Rank: 4
XPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Omega Ratio Rank: 5
XPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
XPP Martin Ratio Rank: 3

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 53
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 51
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

XPP vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) 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.

	XPP	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.56	1.88	-2.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.60	2.33	-2.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	1.31	-0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.55	2.67	-3.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.23	9.05	-10.28

XPP vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPP Sharpe Ratio is -0.56, which is lower than the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPP 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

XPP vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPP drawdown since its inception was -89.90%, which is greater than QLD's maximum drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPP and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	XPP	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.90%	-83.13%	-6.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.13%	-25.13%	-15.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-52.95%	-42.29%	-10.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-85.24%	-63.68%	-21.56%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.90%	-63.68%	-26.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-81.17%	-9.26%	-71.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.90%	-18.14%	-29.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.79%	7.40%	+10.39%

Volatility

XPP vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) is 12.54%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 18.22%. This indicates that XPP 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

	XPP	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.54%	18.22%	-5.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.54%	28.95%	+0.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.48%	35.77%	+3.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	62.84%	45.34%	+17.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	54.79%	44.80%	+9.99%

XPP vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XPP and QLD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

XPP vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

XPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.05%, 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%
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50	3.05%	2.32%	2.96%	2.87%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.81%	1.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XPP and QLD in my portfolio?

XPP and QLD have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XPP or QLD?

QLD has higher volatility (18.22%) compared to XPP (12.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, XPP or QLD?

On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 36.27% vs -6.09% for XPP. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, XPP has been the lower-risk option at 12.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XPP or QLD?

Over the 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 36.27% return vs -6.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XPP or QLD?

XPP and QLD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

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

XPP has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.13% for QLD.

What is the main difference between XPP and QLD?

XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs -0.56), 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.