PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AUGW vs. QDTE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AUGW vs. QDTE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF (AUGW) and Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUGW achieves a 4.26% return, which is significantly lower than QDTE's 16.06% return.


AUGW

1D
0.09%
1M
1.25%
YTD
4.26%
6M
4.69%
1Y
13.10%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QDTE

1D
-0.45%
1M
7.12%
YTD
16.06%
6M
15.73%
1Y
39.17%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AUGW vs. QDTE - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between AUGW and QDTE is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 8, 2024

0.82

The correlation between AUGW and QDTE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

AUGW vs. QDTE - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AUGW
QDTE

Technology

36.2%

-

Financial Services

11.9%
5.4%

Communication Services

10.9%

-

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%

-

Healthcare

8.4%

-

Industrials

8.1%

-

Consumer Defensive

4.9%

-

Energy

3.5%

-

Utilities

2.3%

-

Real Estate

1.9%

-

Basic Materials

1.8%

-

Technology

AUGW
36.2%
QDTE

-

Financial Services

AUGW
11.9%
QDTE
5.4%

Communication Services

AUGW
10.9%
QDTE

-

Consumer Cyclical

AUGW
10.1%
QDTE

-

Healthcare

AUGW
8.4%
QDTE

-

Industrials

AUGW
8.1%
QDTE

-

Consumer Defensive

AUGW
4.9%
QDTE

-

Energy

AUGW
3.5%
QDTE

-

Utilities

AUGW
2.3%
QDTE

-

Real Estate

AUGW
1.9%
QDTE

-

Basic Materials

AUGW
1.8%
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

AUGW vs. QDTE — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUGW
AUGW Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
AUGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUGW Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
AUGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUGW Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

QDTE
QDTE Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
QDTE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDTE Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDTE Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
QDTE Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDTE Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AUGW vs. QDTE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF (AUGW) 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.


AUGWQDTEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.46

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.11

3.86

+0.26

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

22.30

15.60

+6.69

AUGW vs. QDTE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUGW Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is comparable to the QDTE Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUGW and QDTE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AUGWQDTEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.81

2.66

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.68

1.29

+0.39

Drawdowns

AUGW vs. QDTE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUGW drawdown since its inception was -8.76%, smaller than the maximum QDTE drawdown of -22.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUGW and QDTE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AUGWQDTEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.76%

-22.86%

+14.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.20%

-10.20%

+7.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.60%

+0.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.74%

-3.14%

+2.40%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.59%

2.52%

-1.93%

Volatility

AUGW vs. QDTE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF (AUGW) is 0.45%, while Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) has a volatility of 3.72%. This indicates that AUGW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QDTE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AUGWQDTEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.45%

3.72%

-3.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.41%

11.01%

-7.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.69%

14.81%

-10.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.76%

18.42%

-11.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.76%

18.42%

-11.66%

AUGW vs. QDTE - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUGW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than QDTE's 0.97% expense ratio.


Dividends

AUGW vs. QDTE - Dividend Comparison

AUGW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QDTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 43.41%.


Frequently Asked Questions


AUGW and QDTE have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QDTE has higher volatility (3.72%) compared to AUGW (0.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUGW dropped -8.76% vs QDTE's -22.86%.

On 1-year performance, QDTE leads with 39.17% vs 13.10% for AUGW. On fees, AUGW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, AUGW has been the lower-risk option at 0.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QDTE has performed better with a 39.17% return vs 13.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AUGW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for QDTE.

QDTE has the higher dividend yield at 43.41%, compared with 0.00% for AUGW.

AUGW is categorized as Options Trading, while QDTE is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for AUGW and 0.97% for QDTE.

AUGW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 2.66), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AUGW 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