PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HFR.TO (Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF) and QQCC.TO (Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HFR.TO is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Global X, while QQCC.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund managed by Global X. Over the past 10 years, HFR.TO returned 3.28%/yr vs 10.87%/yr for QQCC.TO. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HFR.TO charges 0.46%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for QQCC.TO.

Performance

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF (HFR.TO) and Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HFR.TO achieves a 1.32% return, which is significantly lower than QQCC.TO's 16.94% return. Over the past 10 years, HFR.TO has underperformed QQCC.TO with an annualized return of 3.28%, while QQCC.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 10.87% annualized return.

HFR.TO

1D
0.05%
1M
0.54%
YTD
1.32%
6M
1.44%
1Y
3.76%
3Y*
5.69%
5Y*
3.88%
10Y*
3.28%

QQCC.TO

1D
0.69%
1M
10.18%
YTD
16.94%
6M
14.76%
1Y
35.05%
3Y*
23.56%
5Y*
15.67%
10Y*
10.87%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HFR.TO
Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF		1.32%4.04%6.89%7.86%-0.77%0.70%3.51%4.41%0.83%2.34%
QQCC.TO
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF		16.94%11.64%33.48%35.99%-8.51%7.92%-3.26%16.18%-15.89%18.77%

Correlation

The correlation between HFR.TO and QQCC.TO is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.11

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.01

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2011

0.02

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
HFR.TO
QQCC.TO

Real Estate

0.7%
0.1%

Basic Materials

-

1.3%

Communication Services

-

16.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

8.6%

Energy

-

0.7%

Financial Services

-

0.2%

Healthcare

-

5.1%

Industrials

-

3.3%

Technology

-

50.5%

Utilities

-

1.5%

Real Estate

HFR.TO
0.7%
QQCC.TO
0.1%

Basic Materials

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
1.3%

Communication Services

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
16.1%

Consumer Cyclical

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
12.6%

Consumer Defensive

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
8.6%

Energy

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
0.7%

Financial Services

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
0.2%

Healthcare

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
5.1%

Industrials

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
3.3%

Technology

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
50.5%

Utilities

HFR.TO

-

QQCC.TO
1.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF

Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF

Often compared with HFR.TO:
HFR.TO vs. MNU-U.TOHFR.TO vs. VVSG.TOHFR.TO vs. HBNK.TOHFR.TO vs. HSAV.TOHFR.TO vs. QQCL.TOHFR.TO vs. CBIL.TOHFR.TO vs. CHPS.TO
Often compared with QQCC.TO:
QQCC.TO vs. QQCL.TOQQCC.TO vs. QQC.TOQQCC.TO vs. QQQIQQCC.TO vs. QQQQQCC.TO vs. NVDA.TOQQCC.TO vs. XQQ.TOQQCC.TO vs. JEPQ.TO

Return for Risk

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HFR.TO
HFR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
HFR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HFR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
HFR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
HFR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
HFR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO
QQCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF (HFR.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.

HFR.TOQQCC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.15
2.76

+0.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
5.15
3.72

+1.44

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.79

1.50

+0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

9.43

4.32

+5.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

37.37

16.04

+21.32

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HFR.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.15, which is comparable to the QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HFR.TO and QQCC.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

HFR.TOQQCC.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.15

2.76

+0.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

2.21

0.90

+1.31

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

0.63

-0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

0.00

+0.60

Drawdowns

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HFR.TO drawdown since its inception was -22.56%, smaller than the maximum QQCC.TO drawdown of -36.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HFR.TO and QQCC.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HFR.TOQQCC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.56%

-36.70%

+14.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.40%

-8.15%

+7.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.52%

-22.24%

+21.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-3.52%

-22.24%

+18.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.56%

-36.70%

+14.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.05%

0.00%

-0.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.38%

-8.37%

+7.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.10%

2.19%

-2.09%

Volatility

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF (HFR.TO) is 0.28%, while Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) has a volatility of 3.75%. This indicates that HFR.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 charts...

Volatility by Period

HFR.TOQQCC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.28%

3.75%

-3.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.81%

10.03%

-9.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.20%

12.78%

-11.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.76%

17.58%

-15.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.77%

17.29%

-11.52%

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HFR.TO has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than QQCC.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

HFR.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

HFR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.65%, less than QQCC.TO's 10.48% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HFR.TO
Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF		3.65%3.76%4.50%5.67%3.39%1.29%2.69%2.61%2.35%2.12%1.97%2.13%
QQCC.TO
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF		10.48%11.27%9.89%11.85%11.04%5.15%5.84%6.31%7.90%6.01%6.73%8.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

HFR.TO and QQCC.TO have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HFR.TO is cheaper at 0.46% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HFR.TO is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for QQCC.TO.

HFR.TO is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while QQCC.TO is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for HFR.TO and 0.65% for QQCC.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HFR.TO and QQCC.TO

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