AEMS vs. QYLD

Last updated Jul 3, 2026

AEMS (Anfield Enhanced Market ETF) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AEMS is a Derivative Income fund managed by Anfield, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Over the past year, AEMS returned 40.50% vs 22.03% for QYLD. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AEMS charges 1.21%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLD.

Performance

AEMS vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Anfield Enhanced Market ETF (AEMS) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AEMS achieves a 26.17% return, which is significantly higher than QYLD's 8.73% return.

AEMS

• 1D: 7.99%
• 1M: 8.77%
• 6M: 26.17%
• YTD: 26.17%
• 1Y: 40.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QYLD

• 1D: -1.17%
• 1M: 0.73%
• 6M: 8.73%
• YTD: 8.73%
• 1Y: 22.03%
• 3Y*: 13.65%
• 5Y*: 8.27%
• 10Y*: 9.86%

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

AEMS vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AEMS Anfield Enhanced Market ETF	26.17%	11.86%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	8.73%	12.23%

Correlation

The correlation between AEMS and QYLD is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2025	0.79

The correlation between AEMS and QYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AEMS vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

AEMS

AEMS Risk / Return Rank: 85
AEMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
AEMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
AEMS Omega Ratio Rank: 84
AEMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
AEMS Martin Ratio Rank: 89

QYLD

QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 87
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 89
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

AEMS vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Anfield Enhanced Market ETF (AEMS) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). 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.

	AEMS	QYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	2.19	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.17	3.12	+0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.48	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.58	4.45	-0.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.08	23.68	-7.59

AEMS vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AEMS Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is comparable to the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AEMS and QYLD, 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

AEMS vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AEMS drawdown since its inception was -11.37%, smaller than the maximum QYLD drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AEMS and QYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	AEMS	QYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.37%	-24.75%	+13.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.37%	-4.97%	-6.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.06%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-24.75%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.84%	+1.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.49%	-3.82%	+2.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.53%	0.93%	+1.60%

Volatility

AEMS vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

Anfield Enhanced Market ETF (AEMS) has a higher volatility of 10.66% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 5.58%. This indicates that AEMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AEMS	QYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.66%	5.58%	+5.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.09%	8.91%	+7.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.82%	10.10%	+8.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.79%	14.90%	+3.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.79%	15.55%	+3.24%

AEMS vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

AEMS has a 1.21% expense ratio, which is higher than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

AEMS vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

AEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 407.25%, more than QYLD's 11.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AEMS Anfield Enhanced Market ETF	407.25%	7.53%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	11.59%	11.55%	12.50%	11.78%	13.75%	12.85%	11.16%	9.84%	12.44%	7.69%	9.15%	9.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AEMS and QYLD in my portfolio?

AEMS and QYLD have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AEMS or QYLD?

AEMS has higher volatility (10.66%) compared to QYLD (5.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AEMS dropped -11.37% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, AEMS or QYLD?

On 1-year performance, AEMS leads with 40.50% vs 22.03% for QYLD. On fees, QYLD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QYLD has been the lower-risk option at 5.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AEMS or QYLD?

Over the 1-year period, AEMS has performed better with a 40.50% return vs 22.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AEMS or QYLD?

QYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 1.21% for AEMS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AEMS or QYLD?

AEMS has the higher dividend yield at 407.25%, compared with 11.59% for QYLD.

What is the main difference between AEMS and QYLD?

AEMS is categorized as Derivative Income, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Anfield and Global X. Their fees differ too: 1.21% for AEMS and 0.60% for QYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 2.16), 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.