QLD ranks 1st and UWM 9th of 95 funds in the Leveraged Long (2x & Other) Category.
QLD vs UWM
QLD −0.06pt a year
0.89%0.95%
QLD 14.7×the volume
4.15M281K
QLD +21.1pt
+31.9%+10.8%
QLD vs UWM Performance
+97.9%+0.6%
- QLD 0.89%, better
- UWM 0.95%
- QLD $13.3B
- UWM $216M
- QLD +10.7%
- UWM +20.6%, better
- QLD 0.15%
- UWM 0.86%, better
- QLD 113
- UWM 1968
- QLD 4.15M sh, better
- UWM 281K sh
- QLD $82.56
- UWM $56.94
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | QLD | UWM |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A72Higher | C51 |
| Mission | A95Higher | A72 |
| Risk | B66Higher | B63 |
| Tradability | A100Higher | A85 |
| Holdings | A72Higher | B56 |
| Durability | A81Higher | A77 |
Rank among Leveraged Long (2x & Other) funds
Same Category. QLD and UWM are both graded against the same 95 Leveraged Long (2x & Other) funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
QLDA
UWMB
In short
QLD The 2x dial on the Nasdaq-100. QLD aims for twice the index's daily move, half the dose of the 3x crowd, and it has been running that playbook since 2006. The multiple resets every session.
UWM A double dose of small caps: UWM aims for twice the Russell 2000's daily move, and it is one of the 2007 originals in the ProShares Ultra lineup. Fee is 0.95% net of a waiver through September 30, 2027.
Stated mandate
QLD The fund seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, equal to twice the daily performance of the Nasdaq-100 Index.
UWM UWM seeks daily, pre-fee investment results equal to twice the daily performance of the Russell 2000 Index.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
QLD vs UWM Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
QLD vs UWM Cost
Overpaying UWM vs QLD
$997
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
QLD 0.89%
$16,872
UWM 0.95%
$17,869
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | QLD | UWM | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,576 | $1,678 | $102 |
| 20 | $5,953 | $6,322 | $369 |
| 30 | $16,872 | $17,869 | $997 |
- 0.89%QLD, cheaper
- 0.95%UWM
- Middle half of Leveraged Long (2x & Other) funds
- Median 0.95%
QLD 28th cheapest of 95 funds
UWM 32nd cheapest of 95 funds
QLD vs UWM Dividends
- QLD 0.15%
- UWM 0.86%, better
- QLD $0.12
- UWM $0.49
- QLD $0.03
- UWM $0.16
- QLD Sep 23, 2026
- UWM Sep 23, 2026
- QLD Sep 29, 2026
- UWM Sep 29, 2026
- QLD Quarterly
- UWM Quarterly
Distribution history
QLD vs UWM Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- QLD
- UWM
Risk facts
- Volatility
- QLD 36.7%, betterUWM 38.6%
- Return per unit of risk
- QLD 1.04, betterUWM 0.78
- Worst fall
- QLD −63.7%UWM −61.6%, better
- Market sensitivity
- QLD 2.46UWM 2.54
QLD and UWM in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.89% · 0.93%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.93%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.89% · 0.93%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.93%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.89% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.95% · 0.95%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
