XXXX vs. QLD

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

XXXX (MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN) and QLD (ProShares Ultra QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds - XXXX tracks the S&P 500 Index (400%) while QLD tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XXXX returned 40.10% vs 36.51% for QLD. Their correlation of 0.93 means they have usually moved in the same direction. XXXX charges 2.95%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for QLD.

Performance

XXXX vs. QLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) 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, XXXX achieves a 17.80% return, which is significantly lower than QLD's 18.94% return.

XXXX

• 1D: 2.70%
• 1M: -2.53%
• 6M: 14.26%
• YTD: 17.80%
• 1Y: 40.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 43.46%

QLD

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: -10.89%
• 6M: 16.78%
• YTD: 18.94%
• 1Y: 36.51%
• 3Y*: 35.01%
• 5Y*: 17.45%
• 10Y*: 32.56%
• ALL TIME*: 24.68%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	$408.78M	$399.91M	$439.78M
XXXX MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN	$20.46M	$24.54M	$27.64M

XXXX vs. QLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XXXX MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN	17.80%	17.36%	61.36%	16.77%
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	18.94%	30.36%	42.82%	12.24%

Correlation

The correlation between XXXX and QLD is 0.93, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2023	0.93

The correlation between XXXX and QLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XXXX vs. QLD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XXXX

XXXX Risk / Return Rank: 34
XXXX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
XXXX Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
XXXX Omega Ratio Rank: 35
XXXX Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
XXXX Martin Ratio Rank: 37

QLD

QLD Risk / Return Rank: 39
QLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
QLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
QLD Omega Ratio Rank: 38
QLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
QLD Martin Ratio Rank: 41

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XXXX vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) 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.

	XXXX	QLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.79	0.95	-0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.31	1.44	-0.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.18	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.08	1.46	-0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.77	4.32	-0.55

XXXX vs. QLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XXXX Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is comparable to the QLD Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XXXX 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

XXXX vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XXXX drawdown since its inception was -62.27%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XXXX and QLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	XXXX	QLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.27%	-83.13%	+20.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-37.25%	-25.13%	-12.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-42.29%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-63.68%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.53%	-16.72%	+5.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.54%	-18.11%	+6.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.68%	8.47%	+2.21%

Volatility

XXXX vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison

MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) has a higher volatility of 14.40% compared to ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) at 13.69%. This indicates that XXXX'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

	XXXX	QLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.40%	13.69%	+0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.30%	31.99%	+8.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.96%	38.62%	+12.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.70%	45.76%	+14.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	60.70%	44.97%	+15.73%

XXXX vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

XXXX has a 2.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

XXXX vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison

XXXX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.14%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ	0.14%	0.17%	0.25%	0.33%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.13%	0.06%	0.02%	0.21%	0.11%
XXXX MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XXXX and QLD in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, XXXX and QLD move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, XXXX or QLD?

XXXX has higher volatility (14.40%) compared to QLD (13.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XXXX dropped -62.27% vs QLD's -83.13%.

Which ETF is better, XXXX or QLD?

On 1-year performance, XXXX leads with 40.10% vs 36.51% for QLD. On fees, QLD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, QLD has been the lower-risk option at 13.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XXXX or QLD?

Over the 1-year period, XXXX has performed better with a 40.10% return vs 36.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XXXX or QLD?

QLD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 2.95% for XXXX.

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

QLD has the higher dividend yield at 0.14%, compared with 0.00% for XXXX.

What is the main difference between XXXX and QLD?

XXXX tracks S&P 500 Index (400%), while QLD tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Max and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 2.95% for XXXX and 0.95% for QLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 vs 0.79), 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.