DYLG vs. QYLG

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

DYLG (Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF) and QYLG (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DYLG is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe DJIA Half BuyWrite Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while QYLG is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite V2 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, DYLG returned 19.19% vs 33.88% for QYLG. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DYLG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLG.

Performance

DYLG vs. QYLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF (DYLG) and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DYLG achieves a 5.31% return, which is significantly lower than QYLG's 14.80% return.

DYLG

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: 3.28%
• YTD: 5.31%
• 6M: 6.75%
• 1Y: 19.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QYLG

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: 6.20%
• YTD: 14.80%
• 6M: 15.22%
• 1Y: 33.88%
• 3Y*: 21.42%
• 5Y*: 13.49%
• 10Y*: —

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

DYLG vs. QYLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DYLG Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF	5.31%	12.50%	14.46%	4.05%
QYLG Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF	14.80%	15.29%	22.02%	5.43%

Correlation

The correlation between DYLG and QYLG is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2023	0.67

The correlation between DYLG and QYLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

DYLG vs. QYLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DYLG	QYLG
Financial Services	27.2%	0.2%
Industrials	18.4%	2.9%
Technology	17.1%	53.7%
Healthcare	13.1%	4.2%
Consumer Cyclical	11.6%	12.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	7.7%
Basic Materials	4.0%	1.1%
Energy	2.4%	0.6%
Communication Services	1.9%	15.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

DYLG vs. QYLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

DYLG

DYLG Risk / Return Rank: 57
DYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
DYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
DYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 62
DYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
DYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 54

QYLG

QYLG Risk / Return Rank: 83
QYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
QYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
QYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 83
QYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
QYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

DYLG vs. QYLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF (DYLG) and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG). 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.

	DYLG	QYLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	2.80	-0.75
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	3.77	-0.83
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.51	-0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.32	4.11	-1.80
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.44	18.78	-9.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DYLG vs. QYLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DYLG Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the QYLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DYLG and QYLG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DYLG	QYLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05	2.80	-0.75
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.75	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.13	0.83	+0.30

Drawdowns

DYLG vs. QYLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DYLG drawdown since its inception was -13.98%, smaller than the maximum QYLG drawdown of -29.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DYLG and QYLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	DYLG	QYLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.98%	-29.98%	+16.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.31%	-8.42%	+0.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.75%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.98%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.86%	-6.42%	+4.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	1.84%	+0.20%

Volatility

DYLG vs. QYLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF (DYLG) is 2.62%, while Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG) has a volatility of 3.10%. This indicates that DYLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QYLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DYLG	QYLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.62%	3.10%	-0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.44%	9.68%	-2.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.41%	12.18%	-2.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.44%	17.98%	-6.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.44%	17.93%	-6.49%

DYLG vs. QYLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

DYLG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLG's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

DYLG vs. QYLG - Dividend Comparison

DYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.48%, less than QYLG's 16.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
DYLG Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF	9.48%	9.63%	16.55%	1.38%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QYLG Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF	16.07%	17.93%	25.27%	5.43%	6.91%	10.15%	1.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DYLG and QYLG in my portfolio?

DYLG and QYLG have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DYLG or QYLG?

QYLG has higher volatility (3.10%) compared to DYLG (2.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DYLG dropped -13.98% vs QYLG's -29.98%.

Which ETF is better, DYLG or QYLG?

On 1-year performance, QYLG leads with 33.88% vs 19.19% for DYLG. On fees, DYLG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, DYLG has been the lower-risk option at 2.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DYLG or QYLG?

Over the 1-year period, QYLG has performed better with a 33.88% return vs 19.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DYLG or QYLG?

DYLG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DYLG or QYLG?

QYLG has the higher dividend yield at 16.07%, compared with 9.48% for DYLG.

What is the main difference between DYLG and QYLG?

DYLG is categorized as Derivative Income, while QYLG is Nasdaq-100. DYLG tracks Cboe DJIA Half BuyWrite Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while QYLG tracks CBOE Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite V2 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for DYLG and 0.60% for QYLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 2.05), 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.