FSCC vs. RYLD

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

FSCC (Federated Hermes MDT Small Cap Core ETF) and RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FSCC is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Federated Hermes, while RYLD is a Derivative Income fund tracking the CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index. FSCC is actively managed, while RYLD is passively managed. Over the past year, FSCC returned 44.27% vs 22.00% for RYLD. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FSCC charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for RYLD.

Performance

FSCC vs. RYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Federated Hermes MDT Small Cap Core ETF (FSCC) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSCC achieves a 20.60% return, which is significantly higher than RYLD's 10.06% return.

FSCC

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: 4.77%
• YTD: 20.60%
• 6M: 17.48%
• 1Y: 44.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RYLD

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 2.64%
• YTD: 10.06%
• 6M: 8.71%
• 1Y: 22.00%
• 3Y*: 8.90%
• 5Y*: 2.64%
• 10Y*: —

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

FSCC vs. RYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FSCC Federated Hermes MDT Small Cap Core ETF	20.60%	15.30%	2.15%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	10.06%	5.65%	6.27%

Correlation

The correlation between FSCC and RYLD is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2024	0.87

The correlation between FSCC and RYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

FSCC vs. RYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FSCC	RYLD
Industrials	20.7%	18.0%
Technology	17.6%	19.0%
Healthcare	17.5%	16.3%
Financial Services	17.1%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	7.1%	8.0%
Real Estate	6.2%	5.9%
Energy	4.3%	5.4%
Basic Materials	3.5%	4.7%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	2.3%
Communication Services	1.9%	2.4%
Utilities	1.7%	2.8%

Return for Risk

FSCC vs. RYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSCC

FSCC Risk / Return Rank: 74
FSCC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
FSCC Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FSCC Omega Ratio Rank: 66
FSCC Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
FSCC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

RYLD

RYLD Risk / Return Rank: 71
RYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
RYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
RYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 77
RYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
RYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

FSCC vs. RYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Federated Hermes MDT Small Cap Core ETF (FSCC) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). 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.

	FSCC	RYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.27	2.08	+0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	2.92	+0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.44	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.02	3.51	+0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.68	14.19	+0.50

FSCC vs. RYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSCC Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is comparable to the RYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSCC and RYLD, 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

FSCC vs. RYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSCC drawdown since its inception was -27.17%, smaller than the maximum RYLD drawdown of -41.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSCC and RYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	FSCC	RYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.17%	-41.53%	+14.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.07%	-6.29%	-4.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.05%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.08%	-8.78%	+3.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.02%	1.55%	+1.47%

Volatility

FSCC vs. RYLD - Volatility Comparison

Federated Hermes MDT Small Cap Core ETF (FSCC) has a higher volatility of 6.18% compared to Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) at 1.94%. This indicates that FSCC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FSCC	RYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.18%	1.94%	+4.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.11%	7.78%	+6.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.61%	10.66%	+8.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.36%	14.05%	+8.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.36%	17.15%	+5.21%

FSCC vs. RYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSCC has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than RYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

FSCC vs. RYLD - Dividend Comparison

FSCC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.22%, less than RYLD's 12.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FSCC Federated Hermes MDT Small Cap Core ETF	0.22%	0.27%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	12.61%	12.00%	12.03%	12.64%	13.49%	12.35%	10.76%	6.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FSCC and RYLD in my portfolio?

FSCC and RYLD have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FSCC or RYLD?

FSCC has higher volatility (6.18%) compared to RYLD (1.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSCC dropped -27.17% vs RYLD's -41.53%.

Which ETF is better, FSCC or RYLD?

On 1-year performance, FSCC leads with 44.27% vs 22.00% for RYLD. On fees, FSCC is cheaper at 0.36% per year. On volatility, RYLD has been the lower-risk option at 1.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FSCC or RYLD?

Over the 1-year period, FSCC has performed better with a 44.27% return vs 22.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FSCC or RYLD?

FSCC is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for RYLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FSCC or RYLD?

RYLD has the higher dividend yield at 12.61%, compared with 0.22% for FSCC.

What is the main difference between FSCC and RYLD?

FSCC is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while RYLD is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Federated Hermes and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for FSCC and 0.60% for RYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FSCC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 2.08), 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.