COIW vs. LQTI
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 -69.57% vs 4.82% for LQTI. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. COIW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LQTI.
Performance
COIW vs. LQTI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COIW achieves a -44.80% return, which is significantly lower than LQTI's 0.73% return.
COIW
- 1D
- -6.25%
- 1M
- -25.28%
- YTD
- -44.80%
- 6M
- -48.64%
- 1Y
- -69.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LQTI
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 0.73%
- 6M
- 0.53%
- 1Y
- 4.82%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
COIW vs. LQTI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
COIW COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF | -44.80% | -25.92% |
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF | 0.73% | 6.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between COIW and LQTI is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025 | 0.10 |
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
COIW vs. LQTI — Risk / Return Rank
COIW
LQTI
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.
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.
| COIW | LQTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.80 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.85 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | 1.17 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.93 | 1.42 | -2.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.40 | 4.21 | -5.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
COIW vs. LQTI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COIW drawdown since its inception was -75.01%, 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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COIW | LQTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -75.01% | -3.41% | -71.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -75.01% | -3.41% | -71.60% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -75.01% | -0.87% | -74.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -39.52% | -0.90% | -38.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 49.83% | 1.15% | +48.68% |
Volatility
COIW vs. LQTI - Volatility Comparison
COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF (COIW) has a higher volatility of 23.13% compared to FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) at 1.40%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COIW | LQTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 23.13% | 1.40% | +21.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 63.51% | 4.14% | +59.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 82.07% | 5.09% | +76.98% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 90.41% | 5.93% | +84.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 90.41% | 5.93% | +84.48% |
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 270.96%, more than LQTI's 9.06% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
COIW COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF | 270.96% | 120.37% |
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF | 9.06% | 7.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
COIW and LQTI have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COIW has higher volatility (23.13%) compared to LQTI (1.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COIW dropped -75.01% vs LQTI's -3.41%.
On 1-year performance, LQTI leads with 4.82% vs -69.57% for COIW. On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LQTI has been the lower-risk option at 1.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LQTI has performed better with a 4.82% return vs -69.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for COIW.
COIW has the higher dividend yield at 270.96%, compared with 9.06% for LQTI.
They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for COIW and 0.65% for LQTI.
LQTI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 vs -0.85), 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 COIW and LQTI
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