GIAX vs. QQQI

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

GIAX (Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF) and QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GIAX is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Nicholas, while QQQI is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Neos. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GIAX returned 13.16% vs 19.72% for QQQI. Their correlation of 0.86 means they have usually moved in the same direction. GIAX charges 1.03%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for QQQI.

Performance

GIAX vs. QQQI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF (GIAX) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with GIAX having a 8.67% return and QQQI slightly lower at 8.51%.

GIAX

• 1D: 3.13%
• 1M: -3.55%
• 6M: 7.83%
• YTD: 8.67%
• 1Y: 13.16%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.74%

QQQI

• 1D: 1.51%
• 1M: -1.62%
• 6M: 6.55%
• YTD: 8.51%
• 1Y: 19.72%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 18.71%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GIAX Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF	$1.18M	$1.87M	$1.96M
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF	$330.38M	$327.04M	$357.36M

GIAX vs. QQQI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GIAX Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF	8.67%	11.73%	2.94%
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF	8.51%	18.62%	11.67%

Correlation

The correlation between GIAX and QQQI is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2024	0.86

The correlation between GIAX and QQQI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

GIAX vs. QQQI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GIAX	QQQI
Technology	47.0%	59.9%
Communication Services	15.7%	12.1%
Financial Services	11.1%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	10.0%
Industrials	7.6%	4.3%
Healthcare	2.3%	3.7%
Real Estate	2.2%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.4%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	6.5%
Energy	0.9%	0.5%
Utilities	0.9%	1.2%

Return for Risk

GIAX vs. QQQI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GIAX

GIAX Risk / Return Rank: 24
GIAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
GIAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
GIAX Omega Ratio Rank: 24
GIAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
GIAX Martin Ratio Rank: 27

QQQI

QQQI Risk / Return Rank: 52
QQQI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
QQQI Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
QQQI Omega Ratio Rank: 48
QQQI Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
QQQI Martin Ratio Rank: 60

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GIAX vs. QQQI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF (GIAX) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). 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.

	GIAX	QQQI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.52	1.21	-0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.87	1.71	-0.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.22	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.67	2.06	-1.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.22	7.38	-5.16

GIAX vs. QQQI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GIAX Sharpe Ratio is 0.52, which is lower than the QQQI Sharpe Ratio of 1.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GIAX and QQQI, 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

GIAX vs. QQQI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GIAX drawdown since its inception was -20.38%, roughly equal to the maximum QQQI drawdown of -20.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIAX and QQQI.

Drawdown Indicators

	GIAX	QQQI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.38%	-20.00%	-0.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.64%	-9.61%	-10.03%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.58%	-4.50%	-9.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.55%	-2.28%	-1.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.95%	2.68%	+3.27%

Volatility

GIAX vs. QQQI - Volatility Comparison

Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF (GIAX) has a higher volatility of 9.49% compared to NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI) at 6.60%. This indicates that GIAX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQQI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GIAX	QQQI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.49%	6.60%	+2.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.48%	13.71%	+8.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.36%	16.35%	+9.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.62%	17.76%	+4.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.62%	17.76%	+4.86%

GIAX vs. QQQI - Expense Ratio Comparison

GIAX has a 1.03% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQI's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

GIAX vs. QQQI - Dividend Comparison

GIAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 26.00%, more than QQQI's 14.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GIAX Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF	26.00%	25.62%	10.58%
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF	14.16%	13.82%	12.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GIAX and QQQI in my portfolio?

GIAX and QQQI 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.

Which is riskier, GIAX or QQQI?

GIAX has higher volatility (9.49%) compared to QQQI (6.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIAX dropped -20.38% vs QQQI's -20.00%.

Which ETF is better, GIAX or QQQI?

On 1-year performance, QQQI leads with 19.72% vs 13.16% for GIAX. On fees, QQQI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, QQQI has been the lower-risk option at 6.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GIAX or QQQI?

Over the 1-year period, QQQI has performed better with a 19.72% return vs 13.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GIAX or QQQI?

QQQI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 1.03% for GIAX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GIAX or QQQI?

GIAX has the higher dividend yield at 26.00%, compared with 14.16% for QQQI.

What is the main difference between GIAX and QQQI?

GIAX is categorized as Derivative Income, while QQQI is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Nicholas and Neos. Their fees differ too: 1.03% for GIAX and 0.68% for QQQI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQQI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.21 vs 0.52), 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.