COSW vs. QDTE
COSW (Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF) and QDTE (Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Roundhill. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.18, they often move in opposite directions. COSW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for QDTE.
Performance
COSW vs. QDTE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COSW achieves a 9.32% return, which is significantly lower than QDTE's 12.40% return.
COSW
- 1D
- 3.90%
- 1M
- -5.40%
- 6M
- -3.14%
- YTD
- 9.32%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QDTE
- 1D
- -1.63%
- 1M
- -1.88%
- 6M
- 11.11%
- YTD
- 12.40%
- 1Y
- 26.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
COSW vs. QDTE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF | 9.32% | -10.48% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 12.40% | 4.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between COSW and QDTE is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2025 | -0.18 |
COSW vs. QDTE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
COSW
QDTE
Consumer Defensive
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Defensive
COSW
QDTE
-
Basic Materials
COSW
-
QDTE
-
Communication Services
COSW
-
QDTE
-
Consumer Cyclical
COSW
-
QDTE
-
Energy
COSW
-
QDTE
-
Financial Services
COSW
-
QDTE
Healthcare
COSW
-
QDTE
-
Industrials
COSW
-
QDTE
-
Real Estate
COSW
-
QDTE
-
Technology
COSW
-
QDTE
-
Utilities
COSW
-
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
COSW vs. QDTE — Risk / Return Rank
COSW
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
QDTE
COSW vs. QDTE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF (COSW) 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.
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.
| COSW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.27 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.63 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 9.81 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
COSW vs. QDTE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COSW drawdown since its inception was -20.01%, smaller than the maximum QDTE drawdown of -22.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COSW and QDTE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COSW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.01% | -22.86% | +2.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -10.20% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.77% | -3.74% | -13.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.99% | -3.12% | -2.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.73% | — |
Volatility
COSW vs. QDTE - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COSW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 7.02% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 14.19% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.16% | 17.35% | +8.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.16% | 19.06% | +7.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.16% | 19.06% | +7.10% |
COSW vs. QDTE - Expense Ratio Comparison
COSW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than QDTE's 0.97% expense ratio.
Dividends
COSW vs. QDTE - Dividend Comparison
COSW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.43%, less than QDTE's 46.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF | 21.43% | 4.96% | 0.00% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 46.23% | 49.49% | 32.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
COSW and QDTE have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QDTE is cheaper at 0.97% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QDTE is cheaper with a 0.97% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for COSW.
QDTE has the higher dividend yield at 46.23%, compared with 21.43% for COSW.
Their fees differ too: 0.99% for COSW and 0.97% for QDTE.
Find the right allocation for COSW 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