QLD
Price
$89.12
Change
-$2.65 (-2.89%)
Updated
Jun 26 closing price
Net Assets
13.39B
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
XDSQ
Price
$42.89
Change
-$0.02 (-0.05%)
Updated
Jun 26 closing price
Net Assets
68.71M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

QLD vs XDSQ

QLD vs XDSQ Comparison Chart in %
View a ticker or compare two or three

Which ETF would AI Choose? ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) vs. Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated ETF – Quarterly (XDSQ)

Key Takeaways

  • ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) delivers 2x daily leveraged exposure to the Nasdaq-100 Index, emphasizing technology and growth stocks, while Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated ETF – Quarterly (XDSQ) targets 2x upside of the S&P 500 Index up to a quarterly cap with approximately 1x downside protection through an options-based defined outcome strategy.
  • QLD maintains a passive leveraged structure with daily reset mechanics and higher volatility suited for short-term tactical views on large-cap technology, whereas XDSQ employs a quarterly reset defined-outcome approach that balances accelerated upside potential with buffered downside.
  • Expense ratios differ modestly, with QLD at 0.95% reflecting its leveraged passive management and XDSQ at approximately 0.79% for its structured options overlay on broad-market exposure.
  • Sector allocation in QLD concentrates heavily in technology and consumer discretionary within the Nasdaq-100, while XDSQ provides diversified exposure across all S&P 500 sectors through its underlying index reference.
  • Liquidity profiles favor QLD with substantially higher average daily trading volume, supporting institutional and active trader use, compared with XDSQ’s more modest volume typical of defined-outcome products.
  • Both ETFs appeal to investors seeking amplified equity participation but differ in risk profiles: QLD amplifies daily market moves, while XDSQ caps upside and resets outcomes quarterly.

Introduction

ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) and Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated ETF – Quarterly (XDSQ) offer distinct pathways to enhanced equity market exposure. They do not compete directly for the same mandate; instead, they represent alternative strategies that target amplified returns within broad U.S. equity markets. QLD provides leveraged daily exposure to growth-oriented technology names, while XDSQ delivers a structured quarterly outcome on the broader S&P 500. Investors evaluating these ETFs typically seek differentiated risk-reward profiles amid ongoing sector rotation and macroeconomic uncertainty.

ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) Overview

ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, that correspond to two times (2x) the daily performance of the Nasdaq-100 Index. The fund holds a portfolio of swaps, futures, and equities designed to achieve this leveraged objective on a daily basis. It tracks approximately 100 large-cap non-financial companies listed on the Nasdaq, with a heavy concentration in technology, consumer discretionary, and communication services sectors. Top holdings mirror the index leaders such as Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Amazon, and Meta Platforms. The expense ratio stands at 0.95%. As a passively managed leveraged ETF, it resets leverage daily, which can lead to compounding effects over longer periods that differ from the stated multiple. The structure suits investors comfortable with amplified volatility and short-term tactical positioning.

Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated ETF – Quarterly (XDSQ) Overview

Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated ETF – Quarterly (XDSQ) employs a defined-outcome strategy that seeks to provide double (2x) the upside return of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY), subject to an upside cap, while delivering approximately single (1x) exposure to the downside over each quarterly outcome period. The fund utilizes FLEX options on the S&P 500 Index to establish the outcome parameters, resetting at the end of each quarter. Holdings consist primarily of the options portfolio rather than direct equity positions. Sector exposure aligns with the broad S&P 500, spanning technology, healthcare, financials, consumer staples, and industrials. The expense ratio is approximately 0.79%. This active options-based structure provides a predetermined risk-reward profile that resets quarterly, distinguishing it from traditional leveraged or passive index products.

Industry and Thematic Backdrop

Both ETFs operate within the U.S. large-cap equity space amid persistent interest-rate sensitivity, earnings growth in technology, and broader market rotation. The Nasdaq-100 components driving QLD have benefited from artificial intelligence and semiconductor demand, while the S&P 500 reference for XDSQ captures diversified participation across cyclical and defensive sectors. Macro drivers include Federal Reserve policy expectations, corporate earnings cycles, and capital flows into growth versus value styles. Regulatory developments around derivatives usage in ETFs and options markets influence product structures, particularly for defined-outcome vehicles. Sector risks encompass valuation compression in high-growth areas and potential slowdowns in technology capital expenditure.

Performance and Positioning Comparison

In recent market cycles, ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has exhibited amplified movements relative to the Nasdaq-100, delivering outsized gains during technology rallies but also magnified drawdowns during sector corrections. Its daily reset creates path dependency that rewards consistent short-term trends. Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated ETF – Quarterly (XDSQ) has provided capped upside participation aligned with S&P 500 advances while limiting downside to roughly market levels within each outcome period. Relative positioning highlights QLD’s sensitivity to technology momentum versus XDSQ’s balanced exposure across the broader market. Volatility differences stem from leverage mechanics in QLD compared with the buffered, capped profile in XDSQ, influencing suitability across varying market regimes.

AI Screener

Tickeron’s AI Screener is an AI-powered stock and ETF discovery tool that helps traders and investors filter the market based on technical patterns, fundamentals, trends, volatility, and AI-driven signals. Users can scan thousands of stocks and ETFs using customizable filters such as industry, market capitalization, technical indicators, price patterns, and performance metrics. The screener helps identify trade ideas, trending stocks, breakout candidates, and market opportunities more efficiently than manual screening. Investors seeking data-driven insights into ETFs such as QLD and XDSQ may find the platform useful for refining screening criteria.

Tickeron AI Verdict

Based on structural strength, cost efficiency, diversification profile, and sector momentum, Tickeron’s AI would currently assign a modestly higher probability of favor to Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated ETF – Quarterly (XDSQ). The quarterly defined-outcome framework offers a more controlled risk exposure relative to daily leveraged products, combined with lower expense ratio and broad-market diversification, while still providing meaningful upside participation in the prevailing equity environment.

Disclaimer

The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.

Disclaimers and Limitations

VS
QLD vs. XDSQ commentary
Jun 28, 2026

To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is QLD is a Hold and XDSQ is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
QLD has more net assets: 13.4B vs. XDSQ (68.7M). QLD has a higher annual dividend yield than XDSQ: QLD (26.684) vs XDSQ (3.051). QLD was incepted earlier than XDSQ: QLD (20 years) vs XDSQ (5 years). XDSQ (0.79) has a lower expense ratio than QLD (0.95).
QLDXDSQQLD / XDSQ
Gain YTD26.6843.051874%
Net Assets13.4B68.7M19,505%
Total Expense Ratio0.950.79120%
Turnover16.00N/A-
Yield0.120.00-
Fund Existence20 years5 years-
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
QLDXDSQ
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
56%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
61%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
88%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
87%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
85%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
88%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
79%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
79%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 14 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
80%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
86%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
71%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
63%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
76%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
QLD
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
XDSQ
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
LVOLX19.310.20
+1.05%
SGI US Large Cap Equity A
PMYYX52.100.04
+0.08%
Putnam Core Equity Fund Y
TISLX12.49N/A
N/A
Transamerica Intl Sust Eq R6
DDVAX12.49-0.03
-0.24%
Nomura Value A
MVIIX22.60-0.08
-0.35%
Praxis Value Index I

QLD and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, QLD has been closely correlated with LRCX. These tickers have moved in lockstep 73% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if QLD jumps, then LRCX could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To QLD
1D Price
Change %
QLD100%
-2.89%
LRCX - QLD
73%
Closely correlated
-5.66%
NVDA - QLD
70%
Closely correlated
-1.64%
KLAC - QLD
70%
Closely correlated
-3.93%
MU - QLD
68%
Closely correlated
-6.69%
ASML - QLD
67%
Closely correlated
-2.53%
More