COSW vs. QQA

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

COSW (Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF) and QQA (Invesco QQQ Income Advantage ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.14, they often move in opposite directions. COSW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for QQA.

Performance

COSW vs. QQA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF (COSW) and Invesco QQQ Income Advantage ETF (QQA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COSW achieves a 9.32% return, which is significantly lower than QQA's 11.27% return.

COSW

• 1D: 3.90%
• 1M: -5.40%
• 6M: -3.14%
• YTD: 9.32%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQA

• 1D: -1.39%
• 1M: -1.73%
• 6M: 10.08%
• YTD: 11.27%
• 1Y: 22.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

COSW vs. QQA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF	9.32%	-10.48%
QQA Invesco QQQ Income Advantage ETF	11.27%	2.40%

Correlation

The correlation between COSW and QQA is -0.14, 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	-0.15

COSW vs. QQA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	COSW	QQA
Consumer Defensive	8.5%	6.4%
Basic Materials	-	1.0%
Communication Services	-	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.4%
Energy	-	0.5%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	3.7%
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	58.7%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

COSW vs. QQA — Risk / Return Rank

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

COSW

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

QQA

QQA Risk / Return Rank: 61
QQA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
QQA Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
QQA Omega Ratio Rank: 55
QQA Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QQA Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

COSW vs. QQA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF (COSW) and Invesco QQQ Income Advantage ETF (QQA). 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	QQA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.55	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.15	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.28	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.59	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	10.72	—

Drawdowns

COSW vs. QQA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COSW drawdown since its inception was -20.01%, roughly equal to the maximum QQA drawdown of -19.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COSW and QQA.

Drawdown Indicators

	COSW	QQA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.01%	-19.73%	-0.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-8.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.77%	-3.08%	-13.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.99%	-2.51%	-3.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.11%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	COSW	QQA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.72%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	12.09%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.16%	14.59%	+11.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.16%	18.60%	+7.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.16%	18.60%	+7.56%

COSW vs. QQA - Expense Ratio Comparison

COSW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than QQA's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

COSW vs. QQA - Dividend Comparison

COSW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.43%, more than QQA's 9.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF	21.43%	4.96%	0.00%
QQA Invesco QQQ Income Advantage ETF	9.79%	9.78%	4.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COSW and QQA in my portfolio?

COSW and QQA have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, COSW or QQA?

On fees, QQA is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, COSW or QQA?

QQA is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for COSW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, COSW or QQA?

COSW has the higher dividend yield at 21.43%, compared with 9.79% for QQA.

What is the main difference between COSW and QQA?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for COSW and 0.29% for QQA.