QLD vs TQQQ: 2× or 3× Nasdaq‑100?
Two ProShares funds on the same index. What 2× and 3× daily leverage on the Nasdaq‑100 returned since 2016, how deep each fell, why choppy years hurt more than the labels suggest, and what an exit rule changed.
ResourcesGuide
How Much Can QQQ Fall in a Crash? Nasdaq‑100 vs S&P 500
How far the Nasdaq‑100 fund QQQ fell in every big selloff since the dot‑com bust, against the S&P 500, why it fell less in 2020 and far more in 2022, and what a Nasdaq crash did to the 2× and 3× funds.
Key takeaways
- Far more than the last decade suggests. QQQ closed 83% below its March 2000 high in October 2002 and did not close above that high again until 2016. Since 2016 its worst fall was −35.1%, in 2021–22.
- At the Nov 2, 2026 close QQQ was 10.3% below its Oct 6 record, the Nasdaq‑100’s third correction of 2026, against 3.5% for SPY, 20.3% for QLD and 29.4% for TQQQ. That is still far smaller than QQQ’s 34.8% fall in 2022.
- QQQ is not always the bigger loser: it fell 28.6% in the 2020 COVID crash vs 33.7% for the S&P 500, but 34.8% vs 24.5% in the 2022 bear market (Exent’s data).
- It fell more than the S&P 500 in three of the four selloffs since 2018, and the extra risk came with extra return: 21.5% a year vs 15.2% from Jul 2016 to Sep 2026, with volatility of 22.3% vs 17.8%.
- Leverage multiplies the fall: in the 2022 bear market a 2× Nasdaq‑100 fund (QLD) fell 63.1% and a 3× fund (TQQQ) 80.9%.
Market risk reading, cross‑asset context and an events calendar: see Exent →
In this article
- How much can QQQ fall in a crash?
- QQQ in November 2026: the third correction this year
- Market risk check, updated every trading day
- Nasdaq vs S&P 500 in a crash: which falls more?
- Is QQQ riskier than SPY?
- What happened to QQQ in the dot‑com crash?
- What does a Nasdaq crash do to QLD and TQQQ?
- How often does the market fall this much?
How much can QQQ fall in a crash?
In the six big selloffs since 2000, QQQ fell between about 23% and 83% from peak to trough. The worst was the dot‑com bust; the last decade’s falls were all in the 23–35% range. Knowing that range is the first step of any plan for portfolio protection.
| Selloff | Nasdaq‑100 (QQQ) | S&P 500 |
|---|---|---|
| Dot‑com bust, 2000–02 | −83% | −36.8%, then −33.8% (two bear markets) |
| Financial crisis, 2007–09 | −53.6% | −56.5% |
| Q4 2018 selloff | −22.8% | −19.3% |
| COVID crash, 2020 | −28.6% | −33.7% |
| 2022 bear market | −34.8% | −24.5% |
| 2025 tariff selloff | −22.8% | −18.8% |
Sources: QQQ in 2000–02 from The Motley Fool on Yahoo Finance; the S&P 500’s two dot‑com bear markets from Hartford Funds; 2007 onward from Exent’s data (SPY and QQQ, daily closes; from 2018 each fund’s largest fall inside the selloff, dividends included).
QQQ in November 2026: the third correction this year
On November 2, 2026, the Nasdaq‑100 closed at 27,989.82, 10.4% below its October 6 record of 31,224.69. A close 10% or more below a record is a correction, and this was the index’s third of 2026: it also crossed that line on March 27 and July 29. The S&P 500 closed 3.5% below its own October 6 record. QQQ lost 6.1% in the last three trading days alone, from the October 28 close to November 2.
| Fund | Close Oct 6, 2026 | Close Nov 2, 2026 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| QQQ (Nasdaq‑100) | $759.66 | $681.09 | −10.3% |
| SPY (S&P 500) | $779.09 | $752.10 | −3.5% |
| RSP (equal‑weight S&P 500) | $212.33 | $219.98 | +3.6% |
| QLD (2× Nasdaq‑100) | $100.77 | $80.30 | −20.3% |
| TQQQ (3× Nasdaq‑100) | $84.25 | $59.46 | −29.4% |
Against the selloffs in the table above, this fall is still small: less than half of QQQ’s −22.8% in 2018 and in 2025, and under a third of its −34.8% in 2022. The leveraged funds lost about 2 and 2.8 times as much as QQQ. The losses were concentrated in the largest technology and chip stocks: the equal‑weight S&P 500 fund rose over the same weeks, while the chip fund SOXX closed at $453.65, 30.7% below its June 22 high. Price closes; none of these funds paid a distribution in the window.
These are dated numbers, not a forecast; a correction says how far prices have fallen, not where they go next. How earlier Nasdaq‑100 corrections ran, and how long they lasted, is in the history of Nasdaq‑100 corrections; why the equal‑weight fund moved the other way is in equal weight vs cap weight.
Market risk check, updated every trading day
Data through the close of Nov 2, 2026. The S&P 500 fell 1.7% over the last five trading days, and the Nasdaq‑100 fell 4.4%. The S&P 500 is 3.5% below its record close of Oct 6: a small dip from its record. It is 3.1% above its 200‑day average (+5.2% a week earlier). Its 20‑day volatility is 11.3% a year, about normal for the period since 2016.
The S&P 500 vs its 200‑day average
Daily closes over the last year, through Nov 2, 2026. Green: the index above its average; red: below it.
−3.5%from its record closeRecord: Oct 6, 2026
+3.1%vs its 200‑day averageA week earlier: +5.2%
11.3%20‑day volatility (a year)Median since 2016: 12.2%
−1.7%last five trading daysNasdaq‑100: −4.4%
The three big US index funds
Through Nov 2, 2026. “vs 200‑day avg.” = how far the close sits above or below its 200‑day average.
| Index fund | Last 5 days | Year to date | From its high | vs 200‑day avg. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S&P 500 (SPY) | −1.7% | +11.2% | −3.5% | +3.1% |
| Nasdaq‑100 (QQQ) | −4.4% | +11.2% | −10.3% | +0.2% |
| Russell 2000 (IWM) | +0.8% | +14.2% | −8.3% | +0.5% |
| Index fund | S&P 500 (SPY) | Nasdaq‑100 (QQQ) | Russell 2000 (IWM) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Last 5 days | −1.7% | −4.4% | +0.8% |
| Year to date | +11.2% | +11.2% | +14.2% |
| From its high | −3.5% | −10.3% | −8.3% |
| vs 200‑day avg. | +3.1% | +0.2% | +0.5% |
Exent macro regime score, today
Last updated Nov 2, 2026. Members only.
| Exent regime pillar | Today |
|---|---|
| Liquidity | |
| Credit stress | |
| Economic cycle | |
| Sentiment | |
| Regime: Risk ON · Neutral · Risk OFF |
Price trend and volatility show what the market has already done. Exent’s macro regime score reads the backdrop behind it (liquidity, credit stress, the economic cycle and sentiment) and classifies it as Risk ON, Neutral or Risk OFF. Market intel members see today’s reading and get an alert when it changes.
Nasdaq vs S&P 500 in a crash: which falls more?
Usually the Nasdaq‑100, but it depends on what is falling. QQQ tracks the 100 largest non‑financial companies traded on the Nasdaq, so it has no banks and few energy companies, and its biggest weights are large technology firms.
In the COVID crash those large software and internet companies held up better than the rest of the market, and QQQ fell 28.6% against 33.7% for the S&P 500. In 2022, inflation pushed interest rates up fast and highly valued growth stocks fell hardest: QQQ lost 34.8% inside the bear market, against 24.5%. In the 2018 and 2025 selloffs QQQ fell 3.5 and 4.0 points more.
| Fund | Return a year | Volatility | Worst fall | Worst fall dates |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S&P 500 (SPY) | 15.2% | 17.8% | −33.7% | Feb 2020 → Mar 2020 |
| Nasdaq‑100 (QQQ) | 21.5% | 22.3% | −35.1% | Nov 2021 → Nov 2022 |
| Fund | S&P 500 (SPY) | Nasdaq‑100 (QQQ) |
|---|---|---|
| Return a year | 15.2% | 21.5% |
| Volatility | 17.8% | 22.3% |
| Worst fall | −33.7% | −35.1% |
| Worst fall dates | Feb 2020 → Mar 2020 | Nov 2021 → Nov 2022 |
Their worst falls in this window (Jul 2016 – Sep 2026) were close in depth but not in length. The S&P 500 fund got back to its February 2020 high in August 2020. QQQ took from its November 2021 high to December 2023. See how long crash recoveries take.
Is QQQ riskier than SPY?
Yes, by most measures. QQQ was more volatile (22.3% vs 17.8% a year), fell further in three of the last four selloffs, took longer to recover, and had a beta of 1.22 to the S&P 500 over the five years to Sep 2026: it moved about 1.2% for each 1% move in the index. Its dot‑com loss was more than twice as deep as either S&P 500 bear market of that period.
The reason is concentration. A few large technology companies make up a big share of the Nasdaq‑100, and the same companies are the largest weights in the S&P 500 (how concentrated the S&P 500 is). That concentration is behind much of the higher return, 21.5% a year against 15.2%, and of the deeper falls (AI and chip stocks vs the S&P 500). An investor who holds SPY, QQQ and a few big tech stocks holds one large bet three times.
What happened to QQQ in the dot‑com crash?
It lost 83% and took nearly 15 years to get back to even, counting dividends. QQQ closed at $117.75 on March 27, 2000, and at $20.06 on October 9, 2002, according to The Motley Fool. It did not close above $117.75 again until September 2016; with dividends reinvested, a buyer at the peak first got back to even in February 2015. The broader Nasdaq Composite fell 78% from its March 2000 peak to its October 2002 low (Business Insider, via Yahoo Finance).
A loss of 83% needs a gain of 488% to recover (loss recovery math). The lesson for today’s holders is about range, not timing: the −35% of 2022 was the worst of the last decade, not the worst the index has done.
What does a Nasdaq crash do to QLD and TQQQ?
It turned QQQ’s 23–35% falls into 42–63% falls for the 2× fund and 57–81% for the 3× fund. Each fund’s largest peak‑to‑trough fall inside each selloff:
| Fund | Q4 2018 | COVID 2020 | 2022 bear | 2025 tariffs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S&P 500 (SPY) | −19.3% | −33.7% | −24.5% | −18.8% |
| Nasdaq‑100 (QQQ) | −22.8% | −28.6% | −34.8% | −22.8% |
| 2× Nasdaq‑100 (QLD) | −42.3% | −51.7% | −63.1% | −41.8% |
| 3× Nasdaq‑100 (TQQQ) | −57.9% | −69.9% | −80.9% | −56.7% |
- S&P 500 (SPY)
- Q4 2018
- −19.3%
- COVID 2020
- −33.7%
- 2022 bear
- −24.5%
- 2025 tariffs
- −18.8%
- Nasdaq‑100 (QQQ)
- Q4 2018
- −22.8%
- COVID 2020
- −28.6%
- 2022 bear
- −34.8%
- 2025 tariffs
- −22.8%
- 2× Nasdaq‑100 (QLD)
- Q4 2018
- −42.3%
- COVID 2020
- −51.7%
- 2022 bear
- −63.1%
- 2025 tariffs
- −41.8%
- 3× Nasdaq‑100 (TQQQ)
- Q4 2018
- −57.9%
- COVID 2020
- −69.9%
- 2022 bear
- −80.9%
- 2025 tariffs
- −56.7%
In the 2022 bear market QLD fell 63.1% and TQQQ 80.9%. Neither the dot‑com bust nor the full 2007–09 crisis is in TQQQ’s record, because it launched in 2010; QLD did exist in 2007–09 and fell 84.1%. The trade‑off between the two is in QLD vs TQQQ, and the same pattern for single stocks in when to own high‑beta stocks.
How often does the market fall this much?
More often than most investors expect. From Jul 2016 to Sep 2026 the S&P 500 had five declines of 10% or more and 13 dips of 5% or more (price closes). QQQ fell further in three of the four largest.
| Peak | Trough | Fall | Back to the peak | Trading days, peak to recovery |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2018 | Apr 2, 2018 | −10.2% | Aug 24, 2018 | 146 |
| Sep 20, 2018 | Dec 24, 2018 | −20.2% | Apr 29, 2019 | 150 |
| Feb 19, 2020 | Mar 23, 2020 | −34.1% | Aug 18, 2020 | 126 |
| Jan 3, 2022 | Oct 12, 2022 | −25.4% | Jan 19, 2024 | 513 |
| Feb 19, 2025 | Apr 8, 2025 | −19.0% | Jun 27, 2025 | 89 |
- Jan 26, 2018
- Trough
- Apr 2, 2018
- Fall
- −10.2%
- Back to the peak
- Aug 24, 2018
- Trading days, peak to recovery
- 146
- Sep 20, 2018
- Trough
- Dec 24, 2018
- Fall
- −20.2%
- Back to the peak
- Apr 29, 2019
- Trading days, peak to recovery
- 150
- Feb 19, 2020
- Trough
- Mar 23, 2020
- Fall
- −34.1%
- Back to the peak
- Aug 18, 2020
- Trading days, peak to recovery
- 126
- Jan 3, 2022
- Trough
- Oct 12, 2022
- Fall
- −25.4%
- Back to the peak
- Jan 19, 2024
- Trading days, peak to recovery
- 513
- Feb 19, 2025
- Trough
- Apr 8, 2025
- Fall
- −19.0%
- Back to the peak
- Jun 27, 2025
- Trading days, peak to recovery
- 89
More history: how often the market crashes.
How to watch the market backdrop with Exent
- Exent Predictive Market Intelligence publishes a daily macro regime score (Risk ON, Neutral, Risk OFF) from four pillars: liquidity (money flowing through the system), credit stress (strain in credit markets), the economic cycle (where the economy is) and sentiment (investor mood).
- Members get an alert when the regime changes, plus a daily macro briefing with cited sources and an events calendar.
- Exent’s portfolio analysis replays your own holdings, QQQ and tech stocks included, through 2008, 2018, 2020, 2022 and 2025 and shows the loss in dollars; upload a screenshot, CSV, Excel, PDF or Google Sheet, no brokerage login.
Frequently asked questions
As of the November 2, 2026 close, yes. QQQ closed at $681.09, 10.3% below its October 6 record close of $759.66. Every earlier Nasdaq-100 correction is listed in the corrections history (exent.ai/resources/nasdaq-100-corrections-history).
It is much smaller so far: −10.3% from October 6 to November 2, 2026, against −22.8% in the 2018 and 2025 selloffs, −28.6% in the 2020 crash, −34.8% in the 2022 bear market and −83% in 2000-02. Over the same weeks QLD fell 20.3% and TQQQ 29.4%.
QQQ fell 83% from March 2000 to October 2002. In the last decade its falls were smaller: 35.1% from November 2021 to November 2022, and 28.6% in the 2020 crash, in Exent’s data.
Yes. From July 2016 to September 2026 QQQ was more volatile (22.3% vs 17.8% a year), fell further in three of four big selloffs, and took two years to recover its 2021 high. It also returned more: 21.5% a year against 15.2%.
Usually, but not always. The Nasdaq-100 fell more in 2000-02, late 2018, 2022 and 2025, but less in the 2020 COVID crash and the 2007-09 financial crisis.
QQQ did not close above its March 2000 high again until September 2016. With dividends reinvested, a buyer at the peak got back to even in February 2015, nearly 15 years later.
QQQ lost 32.6% in calendar 2022. From its November 2021 high to its November 2022 low it fell 35.1%, and it got back to that high in December 2023.
Its largest companies, big software and internet firms, held up better than banks, energy and other sectors the Nasdaq-100 leaves out or holds little of. QQQ fell 28.6% in the COVID crash against 33.7% for the S&P 500.
Add market context to your plan.
Market intel provides a Risk ON / Neutral / Risk OFF reading from four pillars, cross-asset analysis, an events calendar and regular written notes. Context for reviewing a plan, not a crash forecast.
See what Market intel includesLimited offer67% off your first month
Educational content, not investment advice. Examples are illustrative; past performance does not guarantee future results.