GAL vs. QYLG
GAL (SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF) and QYLG (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GAL is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by State Street, while QYLG is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite V2 Index. GAL is actively managed, while QYLG is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GAL returned 6.96%/yr vs 13.19%/yr for QYLG. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GAL charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLG.
Performance
GAL vs. QYLG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GAL achieves a 8.72% return, which is significantly lower than QYLG's 14.75% return.
GAL
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- 2.59%
- YTD
- 8.72%
- 6M
- 9.29%
- 1Y
- 20.19%
- 3Y*
- 14.04%
- 5Y*
- 6.96%
- 10Y*
- 8.23%
QYLG
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 6.22%
- YTD
- 14.75%
- 6M
- 14.78%
- 1Y
- 32.88%
- 3Y*
- 21.40%
- 5Y*
- 13.19%
- 10Y*
- —
GAL vs. QYLG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GAL SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF | 8.72% | 15.95% | 9.85% | 13.32% | -13.41% | 12.23% | 11.49% |
QYLG Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF | 14.75% | 15.29% | 22.02% | 38.73% | -26.27% | 18.29% | 12.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between GAL and QYLG is 0.84, 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 | 0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2020 | 0.77 |
The correlation between GAL and QYLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
GAL vs. QYLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GAL
QYLG
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Real Estate
Utilities
Technology
GAL
QYLG
Financial Services
GAL
QYLG
Industrials
GAL
QYLG
Consumer Cyclical
GAL
QYLG
Healthcare
GAL
QYLG
Communication Services
GAL
QYLG
Basic Materials
GAL
QYLG
Consumer Defensive
GAL
QYLG
Energy
GAL
QYLG
Real Estate
GAL
QYLG
Utilities
GAL
QYLG
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
GAL vs. QYLG — Risk / Return Rank
GAL
QYLG
GAL vs. QYLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF (GAL) and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG). 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.
| GAL | QYLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.49 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.24 | 3.92 | -0.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.83 | 17.87 | -4.04 |
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
| GAL | QYLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.32 | 2.72 | -0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.67 | 0.74 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.73 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.69 | 0.83 | -0.14 |
Drawdowns
GAL vs. QYLG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GAL drawdown since its inception was -28.31%, smaller than the maximum QYLG drawdown of -29.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GAL and QYLG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GAL | QYLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.31% | -29.98% | +1.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.27% | -8.42% | +2.15% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.12% | -20.75% | +11.63% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.14% | -29.98% | +8.84% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.31% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.57% | -0.05% | -0.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.74% | -6.42% | +2.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.46% | 1.84% | -0.38% |
Volatility
GAL vs. QYLG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF (GAL) is 2.66%, while Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG) has a volatility of 3.10%. This indicates that GAL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QYLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GAL | QYLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.66% | 3.10% | -0.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.01% | 9.68% | -2.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.73% | 12.17% | -3.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.43% | 17.98% | -7.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.37% | 17.93% | -6.56% |
GAL vs. QYLG - Expense Ratio Comparison
GAL has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLG's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
GAL vs. QYLG - Dividend Comparison
GAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.13%, less than QYLG's 16.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GAL SPDR SSgA Global Allocation ETF | 3.13% | 3.47% | 2.99% | 2.56% | 6.19% | 4.05% | 2.14% | 2.96% | 2.43% | 2.26% | 2.43% | 3.10% |
QYLG Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF | 16.08% | 17.93% | 25.27% | 5.43% | 6.91% | 10.15% | 1.44% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GAL and QYLG have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QYLG has higher volatility (3.10%) compared to GAL (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GAL dropped -28.31% vs QYLG's -29.98%.
On 5-year performance, QYLG leads with 13.19% vs 6.96% for GAL. On fees, GAL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GAL has been the lower-risk option at 2.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QYLG has performed better with a 13.19% return vs 6.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GAL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLG.
QYLG has the higher dividend yield at 16.08%, compared with 3.13% for GAL.
GAL is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while QYLG is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for GAL and 0.60% for QYLG.
QYLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 2.32), 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.
Find the right allocation for GAL and QYLG
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