COIW vs. LQTI

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

COIW (COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF) and LQTI (FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, COIW returned -46.46% vs 5.55% for LQTI. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. COIW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LQTI.

Performance

COIW vs. LQTI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF (COIW) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COIW achieves a -33.93% return, which is significantly lower than LQTI's 0.63% return.

COIW

• 1D: 0.92%
• 1M: -20.57%
• YTD: -33.93%
• 6M: -47.79%
• 1Y: -46.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LQTI

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 0.63%
• 6M: 0.68%
• 1Y: 5.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

COIW vs. LQTI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
COIW COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF	-33.93%	-23.77%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	0.63%	6.66%

Correlation

The correlation between COIW and LQTI is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.09

Return for Risk

COIW vs. LQTI — Risk / Return Rank

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

COIW

COIW Risk / Return Rank: 5
COIW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
COIW Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
COIW Omega Ratio Rank: 5
COIW Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
COIW Martin Ratio Rank: 4

LQTI

LQTI Risk / Return Rank: 31
LQTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
LQTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
LQTI Omega Ratio Rank: 29
LQTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
LQTI Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

COIW vs. LQTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF (COIW) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). 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.

	COIW	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.55	1.10	-1.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.48	1.60	-2.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.19	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.63	1.64	-2.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.99	5.02	-6.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

COIW vs. LQTI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COIW Sharpe Ratio is -0.55, which is lower than the LQTI Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COIW and LQTI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	COIW	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.55	1.10	-1.65
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.46	0.94	-1.40

Drawdowns

COIW vs. LQTI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COIW drawdown since its inception was -74.55%, which is greater than LQTI's maximum drawdown of -3.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COIW and LQTI.

Drawdown Indicators

	COIW	LQTI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-74.55%	-3.41%	-71.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-74.55%	-3.41%	-71.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-70.08%	-0.97%	-69.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-37.82%	-0.88%	-36.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	46.91%	1.11%	+45.80%

Volatility

COIW vs. LQTI - Volatility Comparison

COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF (COIW) has a higher volatility of 22.47% compared to FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) at 1.67%. This indicates that COIW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQTI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COIW	LQTI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	22.47%	1.67%	+20.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	61.92%	4.04%	+57.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	84.69%	5.12%	+79.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	90.93%	5.97%	+84.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	90.93%	5.97%	+84.96%

COIW vs. LQTI - Expense Ratio Comparison

COIW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than LQTI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

COIW vs. LQTI - Dividend Comparison

COIW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 224.62%, more than LQTI's 9.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
COIW COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF	224.62%	120.37%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	9.07%	7.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COIW and LQTI in my portfolio?

COIW and LQTI have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, COIW or LQTI?

COIW has higher volatility (22.47%) compared to LQTI (1.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COIW dropped -74.55% vs LQTI's -3.41%.

Which ETF is better, COIW or LQTI?

On 1-year performance, LQTI leads with 5.55% vs -46.46% for COIW. On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LQTI has been the lower-risk option at 1.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, COIW or LQTI?

Over the 1-year period, LQTI has performed better with a 5.55% return vs -46.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, COIW or LQTI?

LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for COIW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, COIW or LQTI?

COIW has the higher dividend yield at 224.62%, compared with 9.07% for LQTI.

What is the main difference between COIW and LQTI?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for COIW and 0.65% for LQTI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LQTI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.10 vs -0.55), 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.