AAPW vs. NFLW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

AAPW (AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF) and NFLW (Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AAPW returned 58.46% vs -46.05% for NFLW. Their 0.19 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. Both charge a 0.99% expense ratio.

Performance

AAPW vs. NFLW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) and Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAPW achieves a 13.61% return, which is significantly higher than NFLW's -29.02% return.

AAPW

• 1D: -9.01%
• 1M: -0.20%
• 6M: 20.72%
• YTD: 13.61%
• 1Y: 58.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.75%

NFLW

• 1D: -2.42%
• 1M: -9.27%
• 6M: -18.21%
• YTD: -29.02%
• 1Y: -46.05%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -46.22%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	$894.45K	$758.50K	$696.98K
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF	$256.23K	$262.35K	$322.13K

AAPW vs. NFLW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	13.61%	45.20%
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF	-29.02%	-29.54%

Correlation

The correlation between AAPW and NFLW is 0.21, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.19

AAPW vs. NFLW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AAPW	NFLW
Technology	12.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	20.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AAPW vs. NFLW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

AAPW

AAPW Risk / Return Rank: 74
AAPW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
AAPW Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
AAPW Omega Ratio Rank: 75
AAPW Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
AAPW Martin Ratio Rank: 62

NFLW

NFLW Risk / Return Rank: 1
NFLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
NFLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
NFLW Omega Ratio Rank: 1
NFLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
NFLW Martin Ratio Rank: 1

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

AAPW vs. NFLW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) and Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW). 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	NFLW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.72	-1.12	+2.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.31	-1.71	+4.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	0.78	+0.53
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.12	-0.85	+3.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.43	-1.45	+8.88

AAPW vs. NFLW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAPW Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is higher than the NFLW Sharpe Ratio of -1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAPW and NFLW, 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. NFLW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAPW drawdown since its inception was -36.28%, smaller than the maximum NFLW drawdown of -57.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAPW and NFLW.

Drawdown Indicators

	AAPW	NFLW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.28%	-57.88%	+21.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.36%	-54.42%	+37.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.01%	-54.79%	+43.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.44%	-30.38%	+19.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.28%	31.68%	-24.40%

Volatility

AAPW vs. NFLW - Volatility Comparison

AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) has a higher volatility of 14.00% compared to Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) at 12.59%. This indicates that AAPW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NFLW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AAPW	NFLW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.00%	12.59%	+1.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.81%	32.81%	-8.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.52%	41.30%	-9.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.68%	40.58%	-4.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.68%	40.58%	-4.90%

AAPW vs. NFLW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AAPW and NFLW have an expense ratio of 0.99%.

Dividends

AAPW vs. NFLW - Dividend Comparison

AAPW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 30.47%, less than NFLW's 80.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	30.47%	28.83%
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF	80.52%	38.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AAPW and NFLW in my portfolio?

AAPW and NFLW have a correlation of 0.21, 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 NFLW?

AAPW has higher volatility (14.00%) compared to NFLW (12.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAPW dropped -36.28% vs NFLW's -57.88%.

Which ETF is better, AAPW or NFLW?

On 1-year performance, AAPW leads with 58.46% vs -46.05% for NFLW. Both ETFs have the same 0.99% expense ratio. On volatility, NFLW has been the lower-risk option at 12.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AAPW or NFLW?

Over the 1-year period, AAPW has performed better with a 58.46% return vs -46.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AAPW or NFLW?

AAPW and NFLW have the same expense ratio: 0.99% per year.

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

NFLW has the higher dividend yield at 80.52%, compared with 30.47% for AAPW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AAPW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.72 vs -1.12), 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.