EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO
EACC.NEO (Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF) and GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Global X. EACC.NEO is passively managed, while GLCC.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, EACC.NEO returned 20.09% vs 63.73% for GLCC.TO. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EACC.NEO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for GLCC.TO.
Performance
EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EACC.NEO achieves a 8.26% return, which is significantly higher than GLCC.TO's 1.66% return.
EACC.NEO
- 1D
- 0.66%
- 1M
- 4.81%
- YTD
- 8.26%
- 6M
- 8.64%
- 1Y
- 20.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GLCC.TO
- 1D
- 2.12%
- 1M
- 3.66%
- YTD
- 1.66%
- 6M
- 6.30%
- 1Y
- 63.73%
- 3Y*
- 41.85%
- 5Y*
- 21.81%
- 10Y*
- 14.76%
EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
EACC.NEO Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF | 8.26% | 18.86% | 0.72% |
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF | 1.66% | 137.43% | 0.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between EACC.NEO and GLCC.TO is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2024 | 0.30 |
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
EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
EACC.NEO
GLCC.TO
EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF (EACC.NEO) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO). 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.
| EACC.NEO | GLCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.28 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.79 | 2.22 | -0.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.14 | 5.97 | +0.16 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EACC.NEO | GLCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.35 | 1.54 | -0.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.69 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.46 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.91 | 0.00 | +0.91 |
Drawdowns
EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EACC.NEO drawdown since its inception was -13.35%, smaller than the maximum GLCC.TO drawdown of -71.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EACC.NEO and GLCC.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EACC.NEO | GLCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.35% | -71.12% | +57.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.30% | -28.86% | +17.56% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -28.86% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -37.60% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -44.83% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.08% | -21.81% | +21.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.09% | -34.43% | +32.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.28% | 10.70% | -7.42% |
Volatility
EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF (EACC.NEO) is 4.26%, while Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a volatility of 15.10%. This indicates that EACC.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EACC.NEO | GLCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.26% | 15.10% | -10.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.79% | 34.13% | -21.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.97% | 41.73% | -26.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.05% | 31.95% | -16.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.05% | 31.95% | -16.90% |
EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
EACC.NEO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than GLCC.TO's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
EACC.NEO vs. GLCC.TO - Dividend Comparison
EACC.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.43%, less than GLCC.TO's 8.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EACC.NEO Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF | 7.43% | 7.55% | 5.12% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF | 8.51% | 6.01% | 10.30% | 11.16% | 10.08% | 6.31% | 6.47% | 4.58% | 5.62% | 7.09% | 9.21% | 11.63% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EACC.NEO and GLCC.TO have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EACC.NEO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EACC.NEO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for GLCC.TO.
Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EACC.NEO and 0.79% for GLCC.TO.
Find the right allocation for EACC.NEO and GLCC.TO
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