HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO
Compare and contrast key facts about Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF (HBAL.TO) and Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO).
HBAL.TO and QQCC.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. HBAL.TO is an actively managed fund by Global X. It was launched on Aug 1, 2018. QQCC.TO is managed by Global X. It was launched on Sep 13, 2011.
Performance
HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HBAL.TO Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF | -1.33% | 13.57% | 16.65% | 15.57% | -17.70% | 14.70% | 15.50% | 20.42% | -7.40% |
QQCC.TO Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF | -3.61% | 11.64% | 33.48% | 35.99% | -8.51% | 7.92% | -3.26% | 16.18% | -12.31% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HBAL.TO achieves a -1.33% return, which is significantly higher than QQCC.TO's -3.61% return.
HBAL.TO
- 1D
- 0.94%
- 1M
- -4.40%
- YTD
- -1.33%
- 6M
- 0.70%
- 1Y
- 10.97%
- 3Y*
- 12.18%
- 5Y*
- 6.75%
- 10Y*
- —
QQCC.TO
- 1D
- 1.82%
- 1M
- -3.14%
- YTD
- -3.61%
- 6M
- -1.75%
- 1Y
- 15.14%
- 3Y*
- 18.64%
- 5Y*
- 12.76%
- 10Y*
- 9.08%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
HBAL.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than QQCC.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
HBAL.TO
QQCC.TO
HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF (HBAL.TO) and Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO). 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.
| HBAL.TO | QQCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.15 | 0.75 | +0.40 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.60 | 1.12 | +0.47 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.18 | +0.06 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.57 | 1.15 | +0.42 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.41 | 5.03 | +1.39 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HBAL.TO | QQCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.15 | 0.75 | +0.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 | 0.73 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.53 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.68 | -0.00 | +0.68 |
Correlation
The correlation between HBAL.TO and QQCC.TO is 0.54, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Dividends
HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Dividend Comparison
HBAL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, less than QQCC.TO's 11.12% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HBAL.TO Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF | 2.24% | 2.41% | 2.28% | 1.08% | 0.02% | 0.06% | 0.04% | 0.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QQCC.TO Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF | 11.12% | 11.27% | 9.89% | 11.85% | 11.04% | 5.15% | 5.84% | 6.31% | 7.90% | 6.01% | 6.73% | 8.89% |
Drawdowns
HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HBAL.TO drawdown since its inception was -22.49%, smaller than the maximum QQCC.TO drawdown of -100.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HBAL.TO and QQCC.TO.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| HBAL.TO | QQCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.49% | -100.13% | +77.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.26% | -13.73% | +6.47% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.11% | -22.24% | +0.13% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.70% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.80% | -100.00% | +95.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.61% | -99.78% | +95.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.78% | 3.15% | -1.37% |
Volatility
HBAL.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF (HBAL.TO) is 3.85%, while Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) has a volatility of 5.36%. This indicates that HBAL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| HBAL.TO | QQCC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.85% | 5.36% | -1.51% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.04% | 10.43% | -4.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.58% | 20.26% | -10.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.46% | 17.51% | -7.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.18% | 17.30% | -5.12% |