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

Performance

EMXC vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) 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, EMXC achieves a 32.33% return, which is significantly higher than QYLD's 7.05% return.


EMXC

1D
2.43%
1M
-1.88%
YTD
32.33%
6M
36.39%
1Y
62.72%
3Y*
25.41%
5Y*
11.46%
10Y*

QYLD

1D
1.07%
1M
0.23%
YTD
7.05%
6M
8.87%
1Y
22.45%
3Y*
13.42%
5Y*
8.24%
10Y*
9.77%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMXC vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF
32.33%35.14%2.68%18.96%-19.56%8.54%12.76%15.80%-12.96%7.01%
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
7.05%9.28%19.35%22.77%-19.08%10.41%8.72%22.69%-3.07%6.50%

Correlation

The correlation between EMXC and QYLD is 0.71, 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

0.71

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

0.64

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2017

0.58

The correlation between EMXC and QYLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.58 (all time) to 0.71 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMXC vs. QYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMXC
QYLD

Technology

45.0%
53.8%

Financial Services

19.6%
0.2%

Industrials

8.3%
2.8%

Basic Materials

6.8%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

4.5%
12.3%

Energy

4.2%
0.6%

Communication Services

3.4%
15.8%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
7.7%

Utilities

2.3%
1.4%

Healthcare

2.2%
4.2%

Real Estate

1.0%
0.1%

Technology

EMXC
45.0%
QYLD
53.8%

Financial Services

EMXC
19.6%
QYLD
0.2%

Industrials

EMXC
8.3%
QYLD
2.8%

Basic Materials

EMXC
6.8%
QYLD
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

EMXC
4.5%
QYLD
12.3%

Energy

EMXC
4.2%
QYLD
0.6%

Communication Services

EMXC
3.4%
QYLD
15.8%

Consumer Defensive

EMXC
2.9%
QYLD
7.7%

Utilities

EMXC
2.3%
QYLD
1.4%

Healthcare

EMXC
2.2%
QYLD
4.2%

Real Estate

EMXC
1.0%
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

EMXC vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMXC
EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

QYLD
QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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.

EMXC vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) 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.


EMXCQYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.57

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.37

4.54

-0.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.27

26.31

-9.04

EMXC vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMXC Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is comparable to the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMXC 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


EMXCQYLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.71

2.56

+0.16

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

0.56

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.59

-0.09

Drawdowns

EMXC vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMXC drawdown since its inception was -42.81%, which is greater than QYLD's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMXC and QYLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMXCQYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.81%

-24.75%

-18.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.41%

-4.97%

-9.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.12%

-19.06%

-0.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.91%

-24.61%

-4.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.55%

-0.83%

-6.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.19%

-3.83%

-6.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.64%

0.86%

+2.78%

Volatility

EMXC vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a higher volatility of 12.57% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 2.86%. This indicates that EMXC'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


EMXCQYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.57%

2.86%

+9.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.20%

7.44%

+13.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.27%

8.84%

+14.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.82%

14.73%

+3.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.99%

15.51%

+4.48%

EMXC vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMXC has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMXC vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

EMXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.13%, less than QYLD's 11.55% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF
2.13%2.82%2.69%1.83%2.85%1.78%1.45%3.25%2.63%0.99%0.00%0.00%
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
11.55%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


EMXC and QYLD have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMXC has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to QYLD (2.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMXC dropped -42.81% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 11.46% vs 8.24% for QYLD. On fees, EMXC is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, QYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 11.46% return vs 8.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMXC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.55%, compared with 2.13% for EMXC.

EMXC is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EMXC and 0.60% for QYLD.

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.56), 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 EMXC 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