TQQQ vs TSLL: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
TQQQ and TSLL are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. TQQQ is ProShares UltraPro QQQ, while TSLL is Direxion Daily TSLA Bull 2X ETF. TQQQ is broader by holdings count, with 116 positions versus 12 for TSLL. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has TSLL ahead on AIQ Score, 41 versus 40.
What is the main difference between TQQQ and TSLL?
TQQQ holds 116 positions to TSLL's 12.
| Metric | TQQQ | TSLL |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.94% | 0.95% |
| Holdings | 116 | 12 |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 0.73% | 9.9% |
| Average volume | 57,918,163 | 75,280,549 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +23.1% | -52.3% |
| YTD return | +25.7% | -48.9% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 59.8% | 90.4% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -37.2% | -70.7% |
| Beta | 4.33 | 4.44 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.63 | -0.38 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.97 | -0.57 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 40/100 | 41/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 2/10 | 2/10 |
| Momentum | 26/100 | 51/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 0/100 | 0/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ProShares UltraPro QQQ vs Direxion Daily TSLA Bull 2X ETF
TSLL leads
TSLL leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from TQQQ.
Fragile: 0 of 4 evidence groups support TSLL, and the lead recently changed hands.
ProShares UltraPro QQQ
Direxion Daily TSLA Bull 2X ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TSLL over TQQQ, 41 versus 40 as of Oct 24, 2026. TSLL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while TQQQ holds the stronger value profile. TSLL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 0 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TSLL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. TSLL lead: Reversed — TQQQ led by 10 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TSLL now leads by 1.
Compare ProShares UltraPro QQQ and Direxion Daily TSLA Bull 2X ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
TQQQ vs TSLL: which fits what
Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.
| If you want | TQQQ | TSLL | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.94% | 0.95% | Similar |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 116 | 12 | TQQQ |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 0.73% | 9.9% | TSLL |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -37.2% | -70.7% | TQQQ |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 59.8% | 90.4% | TQQQ |
Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare TQQQ and TSLL 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.
- Momentum26 vs 51TSLL +25
- Value33 vs 24TQQQ +9
- Quality77 vs 70TQQQ +7
- Risk Resilience0 vs 0Even
0 of 4 evidence groups favor TSLL. TSLL’s edge is concentrated in momentum; TQQQ keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-23, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-22.
Largest factor move: Value +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
TSLL's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TQQQ and TSLL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TSLL (Direxion Daily TSLA Bull 2X ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
TQQQ (ProShares UltraPro QQQ): the counter-case, on value, quality, valuation.
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 | TQQQ | TSLL | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.94% | 0.95% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 116 | 12 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 57,918,163 | 75,280,549 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 59.8% | 90.4% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -37.2% | -70.7% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.63 | -0.38 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 4.33 | 4.44 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.
TQQQ vs TSLL: five-year payout growth
TQQQ grew its split-adjusted payout at 526.88% a year over 2020-2025. TSLL began paying distributions in 2022, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare. TQQQ: The 2020 payout was 99.5% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year. TQQQ: The payout jumped 164469.7% in 2022, a single step rather than steady compounding - often an index or mandate change.
| Dividend metric | TQQQ | TSLL |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $0.342 | $0.955 |
| Peer rank | #1 of 138 | not ranked |
Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
0 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TSLL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 40 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | TQQQ | Value 33 vs 24 |
| Technicals | TQQQ | Price vs 50-day -10.5% vs 1.9%; vs 200-day 1.7% vs -21.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 0 vs 0 |
| 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 TQQQ and TSLL 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 narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 0 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 TSLL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 24 – Oct 23TSLL lead: Reversed — TQQQ led by 10 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TSLL now leads by 1.
- Today
- TSLL +1
- 40 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- TQQQ +5
- 42 vs 37
- 30 sessions ago
- TQQQ +10
- 53 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- TQQQ +2
- 46 vs 44
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when TSLL 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.
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only TQQQ
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.63%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral
Only TSLL
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (30.34%)
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bearish Crossover.
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 is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.2%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.21%, AIQ -1 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 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSLL's edge.
- 2TQQQ's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3TSLL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, 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.
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | TQQQ | TSLL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.8% | 9.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -16.7% | -1.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.6% | 34.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6% | -19.8% |
| Year to date | 25.7% | -48.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 23.1% | -52.3% |
Technicals
TQQQ has the stronger structure| Metric | TQQQ | TSLL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 23.2 | 45.2 |
| ADX (14) | 25.3 | 10.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -10.5% | 1.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.7% | -21.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 54.9% | 72.3% |
Risk
Split| Metric | TQQQ | TSLL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.33 | 4.44 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.63 | -0.38 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.97 | -0.57 |
| Max drawdown | -37.2% | -70.7% |
| Current drawdown | -24% | -57.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 59.8% | 90.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6% | -8.3% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between TQQQ and TSLL?
TQQQ holds 116 positions to TSLL's 12.
Which ETF is more diversified, TQQQ or TSLL?
TQQQ holds more positions: 116 versus 12 for TSLL.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
The two are within a basis point: 0.94% for TQQQ and 0.95% for TSLL.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
TSLL, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 9.9% against 0.73% for TQQQ.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
TSLL has been more volatile over the past year, at 90.4% annualized against 59.8% for TQQQ.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
TQQQ fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -37.2% against -70.7% for TSLL.
Compare TQQQ and TSLL with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. 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.