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 -0.13, 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
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with COSW having a 11.78% return and QDTE slightly higher at 12.21%.
COSW
- 1D
- 0.24%
- 1M
- -8.28%
- YTD
- 11.78%
- 6M
- 10.24%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QDTE
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- -0.53%
- YTD
- 12.21%
- 6M
- 10.80%
- 1Y
- 31.05%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
COSW vs. QDTE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF | 11.78% | -10.48% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 12.21% | 4.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between COSW and QDTE is -0.13, 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 | -0.13 |
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 | — | 1.34 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 3.06 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 11.78 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
COSW vs. QDTE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COSW drawdown since its inception was -16.24%, 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 | -16.24% | -22.86% | +6.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -10.20% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.89% | -3.90% | -10.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.94% | -3.13% | -1.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.64% | — |
Volatility
COSW vs. QDTE - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COSW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.57% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.27% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.46% | 16.66% | +8.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.46% | 18.97% | +6.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.46% | 18.97% | +6.49% |
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 19.61%, less than QDTE's 44.39% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF | 19.61% | 4.96% | 0.00% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 44.39% | 49.49% | 32.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
COSW and QDTE have a correlation of -0.13, 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 44.39%, compared with 19.61% 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