XPP vs. QLD
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 -5.30%/yr vs 36.10%/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
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XPP achieves a -17.68% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 42.06% return. Over the past 10 years, XPP has underperformed QLD with an annualized return of -5.30%, while QLD has yielded a comparatively higher 36.10% annualized return.
XPP
- 1D
- -4.83%
- 1M
- -6.40%
- YTD
- -17.68%
- 6M
- -20.01%
- 1Y
- -5.89%
- 3Y*
- 7.34%
- 5Y*
- -20.12%
- 10Y*
- -5.30%
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%
XPP vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | -17.68% | 45.84% | 38.18% | -34.77% | -50.06% | -40.45% | 7.07% | 24.88% | -31.36% | 80.21% |
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 XPP and QLD is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.37 |
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 5, 2009 | 0.54 |
The correlation between XPP and QLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (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
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
XPP
QLD
Basic Materials
XPP
-
QLD
Communication Services
XPP
-
QLD
Consumer Cyclical
XPP
-
QLD
Consumer Defensive
XPP
-
QLD
Energy
XPP
-
QLD
Healthcare
XPP
-
QLD
Industrials
XPP
-
QLD
Real Estate
XPP
-
QLD
Technology
XPP
-
QLD
Utilities
XPP
-
QLD
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
XPP vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank
XPP
QLD
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.
| XPP | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.15 | 2.70 | -2.85 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.06 | 3.16 | -3.10 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.41 | -0.41 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 3.42 | -3.60 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.37 | 11.92 | -12.29 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XPP | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.15 | 2.70 | -2.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.32 | 0.58 | -0.90 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.10 | 0.81 | -0.91 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.09 | 0.60 | -0.69 |
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XPP | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.90% | -83.13% | -6.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -32.60% | -25.13% | -7.47% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -78.21% | -0.53% | -77.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.82% | -18.17% | -29.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.95% | 7.20% | +8.75% |
Volatility
XPP vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 (XPP) has a higher volatility of 14.45% compared to ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) at 8.90%. This indicates that XPP'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XPP | QLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.45% | 8.90% | +5.55% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.79% | 24.08% | +4.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.27% | 31.85% | +7.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.75% | 44.74% | +18.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.91% | 44.56% | +10.35% |
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 2.63%, 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% |
XPP ProShares Ultra FTSE China 50 | 2.63% | 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
XPP and QLD have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XPP has higher volatility (14.45%) compared to QLD (8.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPP dropped -89.90% vs QLD's -83.13%.
On 10-year performance, QLD leads with 36.10% vs -5.30% for XPP. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, QLD has been the lower-risk option at 8.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, QLD has performed better with a 36.10% return vs -5.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XPP and QLD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
XPP has the higher dividend yield at 2.63%, compared with 0.12% for QLD.
XPP tracks FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index (200%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%).
QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs -0.15), 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 XPP and QLD
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