DYLG vs. RYLG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DYLG (Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF) and RYLG (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Global X - DYLG tracks the Cboe DJIA Half BuyWrite Index - Benchmark TR Gross while RYLG tracks the Cboe Russell 2000 Half BuyWrite Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, DYLG returned 18.56% vs 30.21% for RYLG. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.

Performance

DYLG vs. RYLG - 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 Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DYLG achieves a 5.72% return, which is significantly lower than RYLG's 14.56% return.

DYLG

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 1.56%
• YTD: 5.72%
• 6M: 5.32%
• 1Y: 18.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RYLG

• 1D: -0.71%
• 1M: 2.84%
• YTD: 14.56%
• 6M: 12.57%
• 1Y: 30.21%
• 3Y*: 13.83%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DYLG vs. RYLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DYLG Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF	5.72%	12.50%	14.46%	4.05%
RYLG Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF	14.56%	9.39%	10.57%	0.71%

Correlation

The correlation between DYLG and RYLG is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2023	0.76

The correlation between DYLG and RYLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

DYLG vs. RYLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DYLG	RYLG
Financial Services	27.3%	15.5%
Technology	19.1%	19.0%
Industrials	18.1%	18.0%
Healthcare	12.8%	16.3%
Consumer Cyclical	11.0%	8.0%
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	2.3%
Basic Materials	3.7%	4.7%
Energy	2.2%	5.4%
Communication Services	1.8%	2.4%
Real Estate	-	5.9%
Utilities	-	2.8%

Return for Risk

DYLG vs. RYLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

DYLG

DYLG Risk / Return Rank: 60
DYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
DYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
DYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 65
DYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
DYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 56

RYLG

RYLG Risk / Return Rank: 70
RYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
RYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
RYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 63
RYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
RYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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. RYLG - 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 Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG). 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.

	DYLG	RYLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.97	2.02	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	2.83	+0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.35	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.24	3.71	-1.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.12	14.23	-5.11

DYLG vs. RYLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DYLG Sharpe Ratio is 1.97, which is comparable to the RYLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DYLG and RYLG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

DYLG vs. RYLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DYLG drawdown since its inception was -13.98%, smaller than the maximum RYLG drawdown of -22.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DYLG and RYLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	DYLG	RYLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.98%	-22.37%	+8.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.31%	-8.18%	-0.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.37%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.56%	-0.71%	+0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.83%	-4.09%	+2.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	2.13%	-0.09%

Volatility

DYLG vs. RYLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF (DYLG) is 2.70%, while Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) has a volatility of 4.16%. This indicates that DYLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RYLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DYLG	RYLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.70%	4.16%	-1.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.75%	11.10%	-3.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.48%	15.05%	-5.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.42%	17.15%	-5.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.42%	17.15%	-5.73%

DYLG vs. RYLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both DYLG and RYLG have an expense ratio of 0.35%.

Dividends

DYLG vs. RYLG - Dividend Comparison

DYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.45%, less than RYLG's 10.29% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
DYLG Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF	9.45%	9.63%	16.55%	1.38%	0.00%
RYLG Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF	10.29%	10.82%	23.73%	5.78%	4.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DYLG and RYLG in my portfolio?

DYLG and RYLG have a correlation of 0.77, 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 RYLG?

RYLG has higher volatility (4.16%) compared to DYLG (2.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DYLG dropped -13.98% vs RYLG's -22.37%.

Which ETF is better, DYLG or RYLG?

On 1-year performance, RYLG leads with 30.21% vs 18.56% for DYLG. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, DYLG has been the lower-risk option at 2.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DYLG or RYLG?

Over the 1-year period, RYLG has performed better with a 30.21% return vs 18.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DYLG or RYLG?

DYLG and RYLG have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

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

RYLG has the higher dividend yield at 10.29%, compared with 9.45% for DYLG.

What is the main difference between DYLG and RYLG?

DYLG tracks Cboe DJIA Half BuyWrite Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while RYLG tracks Cboe Russell 2000 Half BuyWrite Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RYLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.97), 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.