TECL vs TQQQ ETF Comparison
Compare TECL and TQQQ across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between TECL and TQQQ?
TECL is Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X ETF, while TQQQ is ProShares UltraPro QQQ. TECL is tied to Equity; TQQQ is tied to Equity. TQQQ is broader by holdings count, with 103 positions versus 73 for TECL. TQQQ is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | TECL | TQQQ | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.94% | 0.97% | Fund |
| Assets under management | $5.6B | $35.1B | Fund |
| Holdings | 73 | 103 | Fund |
| Top-10 concentration | 21.7% | 45.6% | Fund |
| Average volume | 1,954,283 | 49,280,605 | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | Equity | Equity | Fund |
| Annualized volatility | 78.9% | 58.5% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -49.8% | -37.2% | Risk |
| Beta | 5.21 | 4.25 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.24 | 1.05 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | 1.93 | 1.56 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 40/100 | 46/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 2/10 | 3/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 53/100 | 52/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 0/100 | 13/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X ETF vs ProShares UltraPro QQQ
TQQQ leads
TQQQ leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 2 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support TQQQ, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X ETF
ProShares UltraPro QQQ
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TQQQ over TECL, 46 versus 40 as of Sep 5, 2026. TQQQ's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while TECL holds the stronger value profile. TQQQ also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TQQQ today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. TQQQ lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X ETF and ProShares UltraPro QQQ across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Compare TECL 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.
- Quality30%57 vs 77TQQQ +20
- Risk Resilience15%0 vs 13TQQQ +13
- Value30%33 vs 28TECL +5
- Momentum25%53 vs 52Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor TQQQ. TQQQ’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; TECL keeps a meaningful value 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 +20
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +21
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
TQQQ's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TECL and TQQQ both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TQQQ (ProShares UltraPro QQQ): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
TECL (Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X ETF): the counter-case, on value, valuation, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 64.4% against 40.2%.
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
TQQQTQQQ on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
TECLTECL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
TQQQTQQQ on Risk Resilience, by 13 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | TECL | TQQQ | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.94% | 0.97% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $5.6B | $35.1B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 80 | 123 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 1,954,283 | 49,280,605 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 78.9% | 58.5% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -49.8% | -37.2% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.24 | 1.05 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 5.21 | 4.25 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
TECL and TQQQ share 29.32% of their weighted exposure across 35 common holdings.
TQQQ is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 45.62% of the fund, against 21.74% for TECL (103 holdings vs 73). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
38 holdings are unique to TECL and 68 to TQQQ. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | TECL | TQQQ | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLAPPLE INC | 5.63% | 5.75% | 5.63% |
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORP | 4.42% | 4.52% | 4.42% |
| NVDANVIDIA CORP | 3.23% | 3.3% | 3.23% |
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY INC | 1.74% | 3.56% | 1.74% |
| AMDADVANCED MICRO DEVICES | 1.65% | 2.45% | 1.65% |
| INTCINTEL CORP | 1.29% | 1.52% | 1.29% |
| LRCXLAM RESEARCH CORP | 1.04% | 1.21% | 1.04% |
| AMATAPPLIED MATERIALS INC | 0.99% | 1.14% | 0.99% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
ETF comparison questions
Short answers to the fund-specific questions behind this comparison.
Which ETF is more diversified, TECL or TQQQ?
TQQQ currently has more reported holdings, with 103 positions versus 73.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
TECL has the lower reported expense ratio in the current fund profile.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
The current dataset does not show a higher-yield winner.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
TECL has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
TQQQ has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
TQQQ currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 46 to 40.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TQQQ. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TQQQ | 40 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | TECL | Value 33 vs 28 |
| Technicals | TECL | Price vs 50-day 4.3% vs 1.1%; vs 200-day 32% 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 TECL and TQQQ and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 6 points.
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
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 TQQQ.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3TQQQ lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TQQQ +6
- 40 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- TQQQ +2
- 41 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- TQQQ +2
- 48 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- TQQQ +5
- 42 vs 47
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Aug 8 when TQQQ moved ahead of TECL.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (29.09%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long 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 leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
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 +2%, AIQ +5 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.
- 1TECL closes the Quality gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to TQQQ's edge.
- 2TECL generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3TQQQ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 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
TECL has the stronger structure| Metric | TECL | TQQQ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 41.2 | 38.5 |
| ADX (14) | 12.2 | 12.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.3% | 1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 32% | 17.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 64.4% | 40.2% |
Risk
TQQQ is the more resilient| Metric | TECL | TQQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 5.21 | 4.25 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.24 | 1.05 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.93 | 1.56 |
| Max drawdown | -49.8% | -37.2% |
| Current drawdown | -26.3% | -17.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 78.9% | 58.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.8% | -5.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TECL or TQQQ?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TQQQ is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 46 against TECL's 40. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. TECL is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 TECL or TQQQ the better buy right now?
TQQQ carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TQQQ over TECL?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. TQQQ leads Quality by 20 points; TQQQ leads Risk Resilience by 13 points; TECL leads Value by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, TECL or TQQQ?
TECL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TECL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points. 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, TECL 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, TECL or TQQQ?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, TECL 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 TECL more profitable than TQQQ?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is TQQQ's lead over TECL getting stronger or weaker?
TQQQ lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 6 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 once in that window, most recently on 2026-08-08, when TQQQ moved ahead of TECL.
What would change the TECL vs TQQQ verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TECL closes the Quality gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to TQQQ's edge; TECL generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; TQQQ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; 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 TECL and TQQQ?
TECL: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. 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 TECL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TQQQ it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare TECL and TQQQ with others
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.