PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GLDI vs. QQQM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GLDI vs. QQQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN (GLDI) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLDI achieves a 2.06% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 21.39% return.


GLDI

1D
-0.81%
1M
0.90%
YTD
2.06%
6M
4.42%
1Y
21.23%
3Y*
19.54%
5Y*
11.15%
10Y*
8.99%

QQQM

1D
-0.20%
1M
10.67%
YTD
21.39%
6M
19.75%
1Y
41.98%
3Y*
28.89%
5Y*
18.07%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GLDI vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
GLDI
Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN
2.06%34.25%17.76%8.93%-1.11%-3.42%2.07%
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
21.39%20.85%25.68%55.01%-32.52%27.45%6.67%

Correlation

The correlation between GLDI and QQQM is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.20

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

0.14

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

0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2020

0.13

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

GLDI vs. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLDI
GLDI Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
GLDI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLDI Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLDI Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
GLDI Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLDI Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank

QQQM
QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

GLDI vs. QQQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN (GLDI) and Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). 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.


GLDIQQQMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.45

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.55

3.53

-1.97

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.07

13.52

-7.45

GLDI vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLDI Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLDI and QQQM, 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


GLDIQQQMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.46

2.65

-1.19

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.99

0.82

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

0.85

-0.48

Drawdowns

GLDI vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLDI drawdown since its inception was -32.26%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDI and QQQM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GLDIQQQMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.26%

-35.04%

+2.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.73%

-11.96%

-1.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.73%

-22.70%

+8.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.07%

-35.04%

+20.97%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-14.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.37%

-0.20%

-7.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.00%

-8.25%

-5.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.50%

3.11%

+0.39%

Volatility

GLDI vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN (GLDI) is 3.88%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 4.48%. This indicates that GLDI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GLDIQQQMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.88%

4.48%

-0.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.87%

12.05%

+0.82%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.57%

15.91%

-1.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.31%

22.24%

-10.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.35%

22.12%

-10.77%

GLDI vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLDI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

GLDI vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

GLDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 22.37%, more than QQQM's 0.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GLDI
Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN
22.37%16.15%10.45%10.02%13.73%10.65%14.25%7.25%5.33%7.77%17.26%10.07%
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
0.41%0.50%0.61%0.65%0.83%0.40%0.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GLDI and QQQM have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QQQM has higher volatility (4.48%) compared to GLDI (3.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLDI dropped -32.26% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

On 5-year performance, QQQM leads with 18.07% vs 11.15% for GLDI. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, GLDI has been the lower-risk option at 3.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 18.07% return vs 11.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for GLDI.

GLDI has the higher dividend yield at 22.37%, compared with 0.41% for QQQM.

GLDI is categorized as Precious Metals, while QQQM is Nasdaq-100. GLDI tracks Credit Suisse NASDAQ Gold FLOWS 103 Index, while QQQM tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Credit Suisse and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for GLDI and 0.15% for QQQM.

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.46), 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 GLDI and QQQM

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