QCML vs QQQ
GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, QCML or QQQ?
Leverage Strategy against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | QCML | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.50% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $60M | $506.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.42% |
| Holdings | 4 | 321 |
| YTD Return | -26.87% | +19.30%Best |
| 1Y Return | -18.98% | +22.47%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +26.18% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.42% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 116.8% | 19.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -68.8% | -22.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.7 years | $6,165 | $13,810Best |
| Fund Family | GraniteShares | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Leverage Strategy | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Feb 13, 2025 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 13, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.7 years).
QCML vs QQQ growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.7 years both funds cover.
QCML vs QQQ Performance
GraniteShares 2x Long QCOM Daily ETF (QCML) is an ETF from GraniteShares and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year QCML returned -18.98% while QQQ returned +22.47%. Year to date, QCML is down 26.87% versus a gain of 19.30% for QQQ.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QCML has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 116.8% compared with 19.9% for QQQ. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -68.8% for QCML and -22.8% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.77. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QCML charges 1.50% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $150 vs $18 annually, a gap of $132 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QCML currently yields 0.00% against 0.42% for QQQ.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of QCML and QQQ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, QCML or QQQ?
QCML has an expense ratio of 1.50% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $132 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QCML or QQQ?
Over the past year QCML returned -18.98% vs +22.47% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), QCML annualized -24.76% vs +20.91% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QCML or QQQ?
QCML has been the more volatile fund at 116.8% annualized versus 19.9% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: QCML -68.8% vs QQQ -22.8%.
Should I hold both QCML and QQQ?
QCML and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.77, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, QCML or QQQ?
QCML yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.42%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than QCML?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.