PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EFAA vs. QYLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EFAA vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFAA achieves a 5.70% return, which is significantly lower than QYLD's 7.88% return.


EFAA

1D
-0.42%
1M
2.87%
YTD
5.70%
6M
8.09%
1Y
18.26%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QYLD

1D
-0.06%
1M
1.62%
YTD
7.88%
6M
9.97%
1Y
23.93%
3Y*
13.80%
5Y*
8.43%
10Y*
9.80%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EFAA vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
EFAA
Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF
5.70%25.80%-3.30%
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
7.88%9.28%9.06%

Correlation

The correlation between EFAA and QYLD is 0.63, 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

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024

0.62

The correlation between EFAA and QYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

EFAA vs. QYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EFAA
QYLD

Financial Services

24.5%
0.2%

Industrials

20.0%
2.8%

Healthcare

10.5%
4.2%

Technology

10.4%
53.8%

Consumer Cyclical

7.6%
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
7.7%

Basic Materials

5.9%
1.1%

Communication Services

4.5%
15.8%

Energy

4.0%
0.6%

Utilities

3.9%
1.4%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.1%

Financial Services

EFAA
24.5%
QYLD
0.2%

Industrials

EFAA
20.0%
QYLD
2.8%

Healthcare

EFAA
10.5%
QYLD
4.2%

Technology

EFAA
10.4%
QYLD
53.8%

Consumer Cyclical

EFAA
7.6%
QYLD
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

EFAA
6.8%
QYLD
7.7%

Basic Materials

EFAA
5.9%
QYLD
1.1%

Communication Services

EFAA
4.5%
QYLD
15.8%

Energy

EFAA
4.0%
QYLD
0.6%

Utilities

EFAA
3.9%
QYLD
1.4%

Real Estate

EFAA
1.9%
QYLD
0.1%

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

EFAA vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFAA
EFAA Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
EFAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFAA Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
EFAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFAA Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

QYLD
QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
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.

EFAA vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). 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.


EFAAQYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.63

-0.35

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.81

4.84

-3.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.00

28.36

-21.36

EFAA vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFAA Sharpe Ratio is 1.54, which is lower than the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFAA and QYLD, 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


EFAAQYLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.54

2.80

-1.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.11

0.59

+0.52

Drawdowns

EFAA vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFAA drawdown since its inception was -11.97%, smaller than the maximum QYLD drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFAA and QYLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EFAAQYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.97%

-24.75%

+12.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.14%

-4.97%

-5.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.61%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.22%

-0.06%

-1.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.04%

-3.84%

+1.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.61%

0.85%

+1.76%

Volatility

EFAA vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) has a higher volatility of 3.54% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 1.85%. This indicates that EFAA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EFAAQYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.54%

1.85%

+1.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.72%

7.12%

+2.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.96%

8.58%

+3.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.96%

14.70%

-1.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.96%

15.49%

-2.53%

EFAA vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFAA has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

EFAA vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

EFAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.13%, less than QYLD's 11.46% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EFAA
Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF
8.13%7.94%3.29%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
11.46%11.55%12.50%11.78%13.75%12.85%11.16%9.84%12.44%7.69%9.15%9.42%

Frequently Asked Questions


EFAA and QYLD have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EFAA has higher volatility (3.54%) compared to QYLD (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFAA dropped -11.97% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

On 1-year performance, QYLD leads with 23.93% vs 18.26% for EFAA. On fees, EFAA is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, QYLD has been the lower-risk option at 1.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QYLD has performed better with a 23.93% return vs 18.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EFAA is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.46%, compared with 8.13% for EFAA.

EFAA is categorized as Derivative Income, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EFAA and 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.54), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EFAA and QYLD

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