PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF USD Distributing (BOTG.L) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP (QYLP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BOTG.L achieves a 9.21% return, which is significantly higher than QYLP.L's 4.67% return.


BOTG.L

1D
-0.43%
1M
3.75%
YTD
9.21%
6M
7.98%
1Y
28.77%
3Y*
9.51%
5Y*
10Y*

QYLP.L

1D
-0.91%
1M
2.04%
YTD
4.67%
6M
5.64%
1Y
17.92%
3Y*
6.77%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
BOTG.L
Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF USD Distributing
9.21%5.46%14.97%32.61%-3.29%
QYLP.L
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP
4.67%-4.48%21.40%14.93%-18.74%

Correlation

The correlation between BOTG.L and QYLP.L is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.34

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.42

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 23, 2022

0.44

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BOTG.L
QYLP.L

Industrials

48.5%
8.3%

Technology

39.5%
24.2%

Healthcare

8.7%
7.6%

Basic Materials

1.3%
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

0.8%
17.6%

Financial Services

0.8%
15.8%

Energy

0.5%
0.2%

Communication Services

-

10.0%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.0%

Real Estate

-

2.3%

Utilities

-

3.2%

Industrials

BOTG.L
48.5%
QYLP.L
8.3%

Technology

BOTG.L
39.5%
QYLP.L
24.2%

Healthcare

BOTG.L
8.7%
QYLP.L
7.6%

Basic Materials

BOTG.L
1.3%
QYLP.L
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

BOTG.L
0.8%
QYLP.L
17.6%

Financial Services

BOTG.L
0.8%
QYLP.L
15.8%

Energy

BOTG.L
0.5%
QYLP.L
0.2%

Communication Services

BOTG.L

-

QYLP.L
10.0%

Consumer Defensive

BOTG.L

-

QYLP.L
6.0%

Real Estate

BOTG.L

-

QYLP.L
2.3%

Utilities

BOTG.L

-

QYLP.L
3.2%

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

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BOTG.L
BOTG.L Risk / Return Rank: 3333
Overall Rank
BOTG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BOTG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
BOTG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
BOTG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
BOTG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

QYLP.L
QYLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
QYLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF USD Distributing (BOTG.L) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP (QYLP.L). 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.


BOTG.LQYLP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.38

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.83

4.76

-2.93

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.12

14.09

-8.97

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BOTG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is lower than the QYLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BOTG.L and QYLP.L, 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


BOTG.LQYLP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.05

2.09

-1.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.04

0.24

-0.20

Drawdowns

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BOTG.L drawdown since its inception was -43.70%, which is greater than QYLP.L's maximum drawdown of -22.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BOTG.L and QYLP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BOTG.LQYLP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.70%

-22.40%

-21.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.67%

-3.75%

-11.92%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.90%

-22.40%

-8.50%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.43%

-4.65%

-2.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.30%

-8.64%

-10.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.60%

1.27%

+4.33%

Volatility

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Volatility Comparison

Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF USD Distributing (BOTG.L) has a higher volatility of 12.02% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP (QYLP.L) at 2.76%. This indicates that BOTG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BOTG.LQYLP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.02%

2.76%

+9.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.88%

6.58%

+13.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.30%

8.55%

+18.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.40%

15.11%

+13.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.40%

15.11%

+13.29%

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

BOTG.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than QYLP.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

BOTG.L vs. QYLP.L - Dividend Comparison

BOTG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.22%, less than QYLP.L's 7.74% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


BOTG.L and QYLP.L have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QYLP.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QYLP.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BOTG.L.

BOTG.L is categorized as Robotics, while QYLP.L is Nasdaq-100. BOTG.L tracks Indxx Global Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic v2 Index, while QYLP.L tracks Cboe Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BOTG.L and 0.45% for QYLP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BOTG.L and QYLP.L

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