HBTA vs. COSW

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

HBTA (Horizon Expedition Plus ETF) and COSW (Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Their -0.23 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. HBTA charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for COSW.

Performance

HBTA vs. COSW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Horizon Expedition Plus ETF (HBTA) and Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF (COSW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with HBTA having a 10.56% return and COSW slightly higher at 10.59%.

HBTA

• 1D: 2.33%
• 1M: -0.34%
• 6M: 8.25%
• YTD: 10.56%
• 1Y: 25.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.03%

COSW

• 1D: 0.54%
• 1M: 0.32%
• 6M: -3.06%
• YTD: 10.59%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF	$103.25K	$156.88K	$207.85K
HBTA Horizon Expedition Plus ETF	$6.09M	$3.31M	$2.82M

HBTA vs. COSW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
HBTA Horizon Expedition Plus ETF	10.56%	3.11%
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF	10.59%	-10.48%

Correlation

The correlation between HBTA and COSW is -0.23, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2025	-0.23

Return for Risk

HBTA vs. COSW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

HBTA

HBTA Risk / Return Rank: 51
HBTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
HBTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
HBTA Omega Ratio Rank: 47
HBTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
HBTA Martin Ratio Rank: 60

COSW

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

HBTA vs. COSW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizon Expedition Plus ETF (HBTA) and Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF (COSW). 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.

	HBTA	COSW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.31	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.97	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.73	—	—

Drawdowns

HBTA vs. COSW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HBTA drawdown since its inception was -26.73%, which is greater than COSW's maximum drawdown of -20.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HBTA and COSW.

Drawdown Indicators

	HBTA	COSW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.73%	-20.01%	-6.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.18%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.73%	-15.79%	+12.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.18%	-6.65%	+2.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.35%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	HBTA	COSW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.65%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.53%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.87%	25.80%	-5.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.18%	25.80%	-0.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.18%	25.80%	-0.62%

HBTA vs. COSW - Expense Ratio Comparison

HBTA has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than COSW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

HBTA vs. COSW - Dividend Comparison

HBTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than COSW's 22.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF	22.73%	4.96%
HBTA Horizon Expedition Plus ETF	0.58%	0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HBTA and COSW in my portfolio?

HBTA and COSW have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HBTA or COSW?

On fees, HBTA is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HBTA or COSW?

HBTA is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for COSW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HBTA or COSW?

COSW has the higher dividend yield at 22.73%, compared with 0.58% for HBTA.

What is the main difference between HBTA and COSW?

They also come from different issuers: Horizon and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for HBTA and 0.99% for COSW.