PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CTY.L vs. QYLP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CTY.L (The City of London Investment Trust plc) is a stock, while QYLP.L (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP) is Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Cboe Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite Index. Over the past 3 years, CTY.L returned 16.14%/yr vs 6.77%/yr for QYLP.L. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in The City of London Investment Trust plc (CTY.L) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP (QYLP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CTY.L is traded in GBp, while QYLP.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the QYLP.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CTY.L achieves a 7.42% return, which is significantly higher than QYLP.L's 4.67% return.

CTY.L

1D
-0.18%
1M
0.54%
YTD
7.42%
6M
8.65%
1Y
20.09%
3Y*
16.14%
5Y*
12.29%
10Y*
8.72%

QYLP.L

1D
-0.91%
1M
2.12%
YTD
4.67%
6M
5.60%
1Y
17.84%
3Y*
6.77%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
CTY.L
The City of London Investment Trust plc		7.42%28.16%10.63%4.83%0.49%
QYLP.L
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP		4.67%-4.48%21.40%14.93%-18.74%

Correlation

The correlation between CTY.L and QYLP.L is 0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.10

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 23, 2022

0.17

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

The City of London Investment Trust plc

Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP

Often compared with CTY.L:
CTY.L vs. BNKR.LCTY.L vs. MYI.LCTY.L vs. CCC.LCTY.L vs. FGT.LCTY.L vs. ATY.LCTY.L vs. DHYA.LCTY.L vs. SPY
Often compared with QYLP.L:
QYLP.L vs. QYLDQYLP.L vs. JEQP.LQYLP.L vs. TDGB.LQYLP.L vs. IUKD.LQYLP.L vs. JEGP.LQYLP.L vs. WINC.ASQYLP.L vs. VUKG.L

Return for Risk

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CTY.L
CTY.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
CTY.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CTY.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
CTY.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
CTY.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
CTY.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
QYLP.L
QYLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
QYLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The City of London Investment Trust plc (CTY.L) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP (QYLP.L). 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.

CTY.LQYLP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.56
2.09

-0.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.29
3.03

-0.74

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.38

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.05

4.76

-2.71

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.98

14.09

-7.12

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CTY.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the QYLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CTY.L and QYLP.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CTY.LQYLP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.56

2.09

-0.53

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.24

+0.25

Drawdowns

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CTY.L drawdown since its inception was -67.65%, which is greater than QYLP.L's maximum drawdown of -22.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTY.L and QYLP.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CTY.LQYLP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.65%

-22.40%

-45.25%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.76%

-3.75%

-6.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.05%

-22.40%

+12.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.40%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.12%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.84%

-4.65%

+0.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.42%

-8.64%

-0.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.87%

1.27%

+1.60%

Volatility

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L - Volatility Comparison

The City of London Investment Trust plc (CTY.L) has a higher volatility of 3.21% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP (QYLP.L) at 2.76%. This indicates that CTY.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CTY.LQYLP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.21%

2.76%

+0.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.86%

6.58%

+4.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.87%

8.55%

+4.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.59%

15.11%

-1.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.71%

15.11%

+0.60%

Dividends

CTY.L vs. QYLP.L - Dividend Comparison

CTY.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.93%, less than QYLP.L's 7.74% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CTY.L
The City of London Investment Trust plc		3.93%4.06%4.83%4.92%4.82%4.86%5.13%4.24%4.66%3.86%3.95%3.99%
QYLP.L
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP		7.74%8.93%8.31%9.56%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CTY.L and QYLP.L have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CTY.L and QYLP.L

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