GLDI vs. QYLD
GLDI (UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLDI is a Gold fund tracking the Credit Suisse NASDAQ Gold FLOWS 103 Index, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLDI returned 7.56%/yr vs 9.59%/yr for QYLD. Their 0.04 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GLDI charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLD.
Performance
GLDI vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLDI achieves a -4.75% return, which is significantly lower than QYLD's 7.67% return. Over the past 10 years, GLDI has underperformed QYLD with an annualized return of 7.56%, while QYLD has yielded a comparatively higher 9.59% annualized return.
GLDI
- 1D
- -0.61%
- 1M
- -0.08%
- 6M
- -7.85%
- YTD
- -4.75%
- 1Y
- 11.07%
- 3Y*
- 16.54%
- 5Y*
- 10.37%
- 10Y*
- 7.56%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.85%
QYLD
- 1D
- 0.65%
- 1M
- -0.98%
- 6M
- 5.88%
- YTD
- 7.67%
- 1Y
- 20.66%
- 3Y*
- 12.32%
- 5Y*
- 7.83%
- 10Y*
- 9.59%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.57%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $9.09M | $8.22M | $7.58M | |
| $83.30M | $78.68M | $98.28M |
GLDI vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLDI UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033 | -4.75% | 34.25% | 17.76% | 8.93% | -1.11% | -3.42% | 23.50% | 14.40% | -0.54% | 8.94% |
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF | 7.67% | 9.28% | 19.35% | 22.77% | -19.08% | 10.41% | 8.72% | 22.69% | -3.07% | 18.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLDI and QYLD is 0.32, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.32 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.16 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.12 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2013 | 0.04 |
Over the past year, GLDI and QYLD have become more correlated (0.32) than their long-term average of 0.04, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank
GLDI
QYLD
GLDI vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033 (GLDI) 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.
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.
| GLDI | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.43 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.35 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.81 | 3.38 | -2.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.04 | 15.70 | -13.66 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLDI vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLDI drawdown since its inception was -32.26%, which is greater than QYLD's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDI and QYLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLDI | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.26% | -24.75% | -7.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.81% | -5.78% | -10.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.81% | -19.06% | +3.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.81% | -24.61% | +8.80% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -15.81% | -24.75% | +8.94% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.54% | -2.96% | -10.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.99% | -3.81% | -10.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.26% | 1.24% | +5.02% |
Volatility
GLDI vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison
UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033 (GLDI) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) have volatilities of 5.26% and 5.19%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLDI | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.26% | 5.19% | +0.07% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.59% | 10.04% | +5.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.78% | 11.26% | +5.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.85% | 15.04% | -3.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.65% | 15.63% | -3.98% |
GLDI vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLDI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLDI vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison
GLDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 26.14%, more than QYLD's 11.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLDI UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033 | 26.14% | 16.15% | 10.45% | 10.02% | 13.73% | 10.65% | 14.25% | 7.25% | 5.33% | 7.77% | 17.26% | 10.07% |
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF | 11.89% | 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
GLDI and QYLD have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLDI has higher volatility (5.26%) compared to QYLD (5.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLDI dropped -32.26% vs QYLD's -24.75%.
On 10-year performance, QYLD leads with 9.59% vs 7.56% for GLDI. On fees, QYLD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, QYLD has performed better with a 9.59% return vs 7.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for GLDI.
GLDI has the higher dividend yield at 26.14%, compared with 11.89% for QYLD.
GLDI is categorized as Gold, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. GLDI tracks Credit Suisse NASDAQ Gold FLOWS 103 Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for GLDI and 0.60% for QYLD.
QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 0.76), 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 GLDI 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