HAPS vs. RYLD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

HAPS (Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF) and RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HAPS is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Human Capital Factor Small Cap Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while RYLD is a Derivative Income fund tracking the CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, HAPS returned 13.58%/yr vs 8.72%/yr for RYLD. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

HAPS vs. RYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HAPS achieves a 14.76% return, which is significantly higher than RYLD's 9.51% return.

HAPS

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 4.37%
• YTD: 14.76%
• 6M: 12.78%
• 1Y: 30.70%
• 3Y*: 13.58%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RYLD

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: 2.12%
• YTD: 9.51%
• 6M: 8.37%
• 1Y: 20.74%
• 3Y*: 8.72%
• 5Y*: 2.45%
• 10Y*: —

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

HAPS vs. RYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HAPS Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF	14.76%	8.35%	4.08%	13.63%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	9.51%	5.65%	10.13%	1.32%

Correlation

The correlation between HAPS and RYLD is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2023	0.84

The correlation between HAPS and RYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

HAPS vs. RYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HAPS	RYLD
Financial Services	17.3%	15.5%
Technology	16.8%	19.0%
Healthcare	16.1%	16.3%
Industrials	14.7%	18.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	8.0%
Energy	7.2%	5.4%
Real Estate	5.9%	5.9%
Basic Materials	5.7%	4.7%
Consumer Defensive	2.7%	2.3%
Communication Services	2.7%	2.4%
Utilities	2.5%	2.8%

Return for Risk

HAPS vs. RYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

HAPS

HAPS Risk / Return Rank: 61
HAPS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
HAPS Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
HAPS Omega Ratio Rank: 53
HAPS Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
HAPS Martin Ratio Rank: 63

RYLD

RYLD Risk / Return Rank: 68
RYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
RYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
RYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 73
RYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
RYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

HAPS vs. RYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). 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.

	HAPS	RYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.81	1.96	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.66	2.76	-0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.41	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	3.31	-0.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.43	13.37	-2.94

HAPS vs. RYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HAPS Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is comparable to the RYLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HAPS and RYLD, 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

HAPS vs. RYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HAPS drawdown since its inception was -27.44%, smaller than the maximum RYLD drawdown of -41.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HAPS and RYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	HAPS	RYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.44%	-41.53%	+14.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-6.29%	-3.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.44%	-19.05%	-8.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.50%	+0.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.04%	-8.78%	+2.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.95%	1.55%	+1.40%

Volatility

HAPS vs. RYLD - Volatility Comparison

Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS) has a higher volatility of 4.01% compared to Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) at 2.00%. This indicates that HAPS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HAPS	RYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.01%	2.00%	+2.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.92%	7.80%	+4.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.10%	10.66%	+6.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.75%	14.05%	+6.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.75%	17.15%	+3.60%

HAPS vs. RYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both HAPS and RYLD have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

HAPS vs. RYLD - Dividend Comparison

HAPS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.49%, less than RYLD's 11.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
HAPS Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF	0.49%	0.57%	0.72%	0.42%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	11.73%	12.00%	12.03%	12.64%	13.49%	12.35%	10.76%	6.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HAPS and RYLD in my portfolio?

HAPS and RYLD have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HAPS or RYLD?

HAPS has higher volatility (4.01%) compared to RYLD (2.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HAPS dropped -27.44% vs RYLD's -41.53%.

Which ETF is better, HAPS or RYLD?

On 3-year performance, HAPS leads with 13.58% vs 8.72% for RYLD. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, RYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HAPS or RYLD?

Over the 3-year period, HAPS has performed better with a 13.58% return vs 8.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HAPS or RYLD?

HAPS and RYLD have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HAPS or RYLD?

RYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.73%, compared with 0.49% for HAPS.

What is the main difference between HAPS and RYLD?

HAPS is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while RYLD is Derivative Income. HAPS tracks Human Capital Factor Small Cap Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while RYLD tracks CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index. They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Global X.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.96 vs 1.81), 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.