AAPW vs. QDTE
AAPW (AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF) and QDTE (Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AAPW returned 59.54% vs 40.36% for QDTE. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AAPW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for QDTE.
Performance
AAPW vs. QDTE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AAPW achieves a 15.21% return, which is significantly lower than QDTE's 16.58% return.
AAPW
- 1D
- -1.85%
- 1M
- 14.30%
- YTD
- 15.21%
- 6M
- 9.47%
- 1Y
- 59.54%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QDTE
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 8.99%
- YTD
- 16.58%
- 6M
- 16.20%
- 1Y
- 40.36%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AAPW vs. QDTE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF | 15.21% | 8.56% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 16.58% | 12.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between AAPW and QDTE is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025 | 0.46 |
AAPW vs. QDTE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
AAPW
QDTE
Technology
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Technology
AAPW
QDTE
-
Basic Materials
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Communication Services
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Consumer Cyclical
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Consumer Defensive
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Energy
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Financial Services
AAPW
-
QDTE
Healthcare
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Industrials
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Real Estate
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Utilities
AAPW
-
QDTE
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AAPW vs. QDTE — Risk / Return Rank
AAPW
QDTE
AAPW vs. QDTE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) and Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE). 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.
| AAPW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.47 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.45 | 3.98 | -0.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.65 | 16.08 | -7.43 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AAPW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.17 | 2.74 | -0.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.55 | 1.30 | -0.75 |
Drawdowns
AAPW vs. QDTE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AAPW drawdown since its inception was -36.28%, which is greater than QDTE's maximum drawdown of -22.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAPW and QDTE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AAPW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.28% | -22.86% | -13.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.36% | -10.20% | -7.16% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.85% | -0.16% | -1.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.18% | -3.14% | -8.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.91% | 2.52% | +4.39% |
Volatility
AAPW vs. QDTE - Volatility Comparison
AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) has a higher volatility of 6.61% compared to Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) at 3.75%. This indicates that AAPW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QDTE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AAPW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.61% | 3.75% | +2.86% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.54% | 11.01% | +8.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.56% | 14.81% | +12.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.72% | 18.43% | +16.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.72% | 18.43% | +16.29% |
AAPW vs. QDTE - Expense Ratio Comparison
AAPW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than QDTE's 0.97% expense ratio.
Dividends
AAPW vs. QDTE - Dividend Comparison
AAPW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 31.37%, less than QDTE's 42.16% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF | 31.37% | 28.83% | 0.00% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 42.16% | 49.49% | 32.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AAPW and QDTE have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AAPW has higher volatility (6.61%) compared to QDTE (3.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAPW dropped -36.28% vs QDTE's -22.86%.
On 1-year performance, AAPW leads with 59.54% vs 40.36% for QDTE. On fees, QDTE is cheaper at 0.97% per year. On volatility, QDTE has been the lower-risk option at 3.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AAPW has performed better with a 59.54% return vs 40.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QDTE is cheaper with a 0.97% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AAPW.
QDTE has the higher dividend yield at 42.16%, compared with 31.37% for AAPW.
Their fees differ too: 0.99% for AAPW and 0.97% for QDTE.
QDTE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.17), 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.
Find the right allocation for AAPW and QDTE
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer