GLDW vs. QYLD
GLDW (Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLDW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by State Street, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. GLDW is actively managed, while QYLD is passively managed. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GLDW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLD.
Performance
GLDW vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLDW achieves a 1.00% return, which is significantly lower than QYLD's 7.88% return.
GLDW
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- -2.48%
- YTD
- 1.00%
- 6M
- 3.47%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QYLD
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 1.62%
- YTD
- 7.88%
- 6M
- 9.97%
- 1Y
- 23.93%
- 3Y*
- 13.80%
- 5Y*
- 8.43%
- 10Y*
- 9.80%
GLDW vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GLDW Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF | 1.00% | 7.63% |
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF | 7.88% | 3.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLDW and QYLD is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2025 | 0.38 |
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
GLDW vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank
GLDW
QYLD
GLDW vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF (GLDW) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLDW | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.80 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.58 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.63 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 0.59 | -0.17 |
Drawdowns
GLDW vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLDW drawdown since its inception was -23.59%, roughly equal to the maximum QYLD drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDW and QYLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLDW | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.59% | -24.75% | +1.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -4.97% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.06% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.61% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -24.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.51% | -0.06% | -22.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.93% | -3.84% | -5.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.85% | — |
Volatility
GLDW vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLDW | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.85% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 7.12% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.90% | 8.58% | +28.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.90% | 14.70% | +22.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.90% | 15.49% | +21.41% |
GLDW vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLDW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLDW vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison
GLDW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.48%, more than QYLD's 11.46% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLDW Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF | 19.48% | 3.75% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF | 11.46% | 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
GLDW and QYLD have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QYLD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for GLDW.
GLDW has the higher dividend yield at 19.48%, compared with 11.46% for QYLD.
GLDW is categorized as Derivative Income, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for GLDW and 0.60% for QYLD.
Find the right allocation for GLDW 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