NVDL vs TQQQ Stock Comparison
GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF vs ProShares UltraPro QQQ
NVDL leads
NVDL leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum.
Competitive: 2 of 3 evidence groups support NVDL, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF
ProShares UltraPro QQQ
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NVDL over TQQQ, 50 versus 46 as of Sep 5, 2026. NVDL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while TQQQ holds the stronger risk resilience profile. NVDL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor NVDL today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. NVDL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF and ProShares UltraPro QQQ across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare NVDL and TQQQ against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Risk Resilience15%0 vs 13TQQQ +13
- Quality30%65 vs 77TQQQ +12
- Momentum25%63 vs 52NVDL +11
2 of 3 evidence groups favor NVDL. NVDL’s edge is concentrated in momentum; TQQQ keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +21
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
NVDL's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NVDL and TQQQ both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NVDL (GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
TQQQ (ProShares UltraPro QQQ): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
NVDLNVDL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
NVDLNVDL on the Momentum factor, by 11 points.
Lower downside
TQQQTQQQ on Risk Resilience, by 13 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor NVDL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NVDL | 50 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | NVDL | Price vs 50-day 16.9% vs 1.1%; vs 200-day 21.7% vs 17.3% |
| Risk Resilience | TQQQ | Risk Resilience 0 vs 13 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NVDL and TQQQ and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on NVDL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3NVDL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NVDL +4
- 50 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- NVDL +6
- 49 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- NVDL +4
- 54 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- TQQQ +7
- 40 vs 47
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Aug 27 when NVDL moved ahead of TQQQ.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.81%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (16.59%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.05%)
TQQQ is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.65%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.47%, AIQ +5 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1TQQQ closes the Momentum gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to NVDL's edge.
- 2TQQQ's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3NVDL's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Technicals
NVDL has the stronger structure| Metric | NVDL | TQQQ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 50.9 | 38.5 |
| ADX (14) | 15.1 | 12.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 16.9% | 1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 21.7% | 17.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 90% | 40.2% |
Risk
TQQQ is the more resilient| Metric | NVDL | TQQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.89 | 4.25 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.77 | 1.05 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.3 | 1.56 |
| Max drawdown | -42.2% | -37.2% |
| Current drawdown | -13.8% | -17.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 76.7% | 58.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.7% | -5.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NVDL or TQQQ?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NVDL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 50 against TQQQ's 46. The edge comes from momentum. TQQQ is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is NVDL or TQQQ the better buy right now?
NVDL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 2 of 3 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor NVDL over TQQQ?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. TQQQ leads Risk Resilience by 13 points; TQQQ leads Quality by 12 points; NVDL leads Momentum by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, NVDL or TQQQ?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, NVDL or TQQQ?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, NVDL or TQQQ?
NVDL on the Momentum factor, by 11 points. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, NVDL or TQQQ?
TQQQ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TQQQ on Risk Resilience, by 13 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is NVDL more profitable than TQQQ?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is NVDL's lead over TQQQ getting stronger or weaker?
NVDL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-27, when NVDL moved ahead of TQQQ.
What would change the NVDL vs TQQQ verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TQQQ closes the Momentum gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to NVDL's edge; TQQQ's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; NVDL's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about NVDL and TQQQ?
NVDL: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. TQQQ: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on NVDL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TQQQ it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.