AAPW vs. LFGY

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

AAPW (AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF) and LFGY (YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AAPW returned 61.94% vs -9.94% for LFGY. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AAPW charges 0.99%/yr vs 1.02%/yr for LFGY.

Performance

AAPW vs. LFGY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) and YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF (LFGY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAPW achieves a 21.74% return, which is significantly higher than LFGY's 8.72% return.

AAPW

• 1D: -2.91%
• 1M: 11.04%
• 6M: 31.34%
• YTD: 21.74%
• 1Y: 61.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.94%

LFGY

• 1D: 3.97%
• 1M: -9.03%
• 6M: -2.03%
• YTD: 8.72%
• 1Y: -9.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -0.96%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AAPW vs. LFGY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	21.74%	8.71%
LFGY YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF	8.72%	-7.28%

Correlation

The correlation between AAPW and LFGY is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025	0.29

AAPW vs. LFGY - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AAPW	LFGY
Technology	13.0%	34.1%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	6.7%
Consumer Cyclical	-	4.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	55.3%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AAPW vs. LFGY — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AAPW

AAPW Risk / Return Rank: 80
AAPW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
AAPW Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
AAPW Omega Ratio Rank: 82
AAPW Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
AAPW Martin Ratio Rank: 65

LFGY

LFGY Risk / Return Rank: 8
LFGY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
LFGY Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
LFGY Omega Ratio Rank: 8
LFGY Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
LFGY Martin Ratio Rank: 7

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AAPW vs. LFGY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) and YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF (LFGY). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AAPW	LFGY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	-0.25	+2.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	-0.09	+2.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	0.99	+0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.59	-0.28	+3.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.55	-0.58	+9.13

AAPW vs. LFGY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAPW Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is higher than the LFGY Sharpe Ratio of -0.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAPW and LFGY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AAPW vs. LFGY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAPW drawdown since its inception was -36.28%, roughly equal to the maximum LFGY drawdown of -35.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAPW and LFGY.

Drawdown Indicators

	AAPW	LFGY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.28%	-35.94%	-0.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.36%	-35.94%	+18.58%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.91%	-16.95%	+14.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.64%	-14.06%	+3.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.27%	17.19%	-9.92%

Volatility

AAPW vs. LFGY - Volatility Comparison

AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) has a higher volatility of 12.17% compared to YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF (LFGY) at 11.39%. This indicates that AAPW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LFGY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AAPW	LFGY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.17%	11.39%	+0.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.14%	32.38%	-9.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.86%	39.55%	-9.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.02%	42.27%	-7.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.02%	42.27%	-7.25%

AAPW vs. LFGY - Expense Ratio Comparison

AAPW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is lower than LFGY's 1.02% expense ratio.

Dividends

AAPW vs. LFGY - Dividend Comparison

AAPW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 29.42%, less than LFGY's 85.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	29.42%	28.83%
LFGY YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF	85.09%	94.90%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AAPW and LFGY in my portfolio?

AAPW and LFGY have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AAPW or LFGY?

AAPW has higher volatility (12.17%) compared to LFGY (11.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAPW dropped -36.28% vs LFGY's -35.94%.

Which ETF is better, AAPW or LFGY?

On 1-year performance, AAPW leads with 61.94% vs -9.94% for LFGY. On fees, AAPW is cheaper at 0.99% per year. On volatility, LFGY has been the lower-risk option at 11.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AAPW or LFGY?

Over the 1-year period, AAPW has performed better with a 61.94% return vs -9.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AAPW or LFGY?

AAPW is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for LFGY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AAPW or LFGY?

LFGY has the higher dividend yield at 85.09%, compared with 29.42% for AAPW.

What is the main difference between AAPW and LFGY?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for AAPW and 1.02% for LFGY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AAPW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs -0.25), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.