HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HUN.TO (Global X Natural Gas ETF) and QQCL.TO (Global X Enhanced NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HUN.TO is a Commodities fund tracking the Solactive Natural Gas Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER, while QQCL.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Global X. HUN.TO is passively managed, while QQCL.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, HUN.TO returned -16.44% vs 43.99% for QQCL.TO. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. HUN.TO charges 1.40%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for QQCL.TO.

Performance

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Natural Gas ETF (HUN.TO) and Global X Enhanced NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HUN.TO achieves a -4.38% return, which is significantly lower than QQCL.TO's 20.85% return.

HUN.TO

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -6.67%
• YTD: -4.38%
• 6M: -11.35%
• 1Y: -16.44%
• 3Y*: -7.05%
• 5Y*: 6.04%
• 10Y*: 6.09%

QQCL.TO

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 12.39%
• YTD: 20.85%
• 6M: 17.94%
• 1Y: 43.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HUN.TO Global X Natural Gas ETF	-4.38%	-5.60%	10.19%	-27.88%
QQCL.TO Global X Enhanced NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF	20.85%	13.10%	41.38%	5.48%

Correlation

The correlation between HUN.TO and QQCL.TO is -0.24, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2023	-0.06

The correlation between HUN.TO and QQCL.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.24 (1 year) to -0.06 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HUN.TO

HUN.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4
HUN.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
HUN.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
HUN.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4
HUN.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
HUN.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4

QQCL.TO

QQCL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 81
QQCL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
QQCL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
QQCL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
QQCL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
QQCL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Natural Gas ETF (HUN.TO) and Global X Enhanced NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCL.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.

	HUN.TO	QQCL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.54	2.81	-3.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.61	3.65	-4.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	1.51	-0.58
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.65	4.14	-4.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.00	15.49	-16.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HUN.TO Sharpe Ratio is -0.54, which is lower than the QQCL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUN.TO and QQCL.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HUN.TO	QQCL.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.54	2.81	-3.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.15	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.18	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.00	1.52	-1.52

Drawdowns

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUN.TO drawdown since its inception was -85.33%, which is greater than QQCL.TO's maximum drawdown of -25.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUN.TO and QQCL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HUN.TO	QQCL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-85.33%	-25.63%	-59.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.56%	-10.68%	-14.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.11%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-68.00%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-68.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-66.12%	0.00%	-66.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-64.23%	-3.32%	-60.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.51%	2.85%	+13.66%

Volatility

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO - Volatility Comparison

Global X Natural Gas ETF (HUN.TO) has a higher volatility of 6.11% compared to Global X Enhanced NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCL.TO) at 4.30%. This indicates that HUN.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQCL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HUN.TO	QQCL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.11%	4.30%	+1.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.03%	12.58%	+10.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.45%	15.74%	+14.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	41.16%	20.38%	+20.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.86%	20.38%	+14.48%

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HUN.TO has a 1.40% expense ratio, which is higher than QQCL.TO's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

HUN.TO vs. QQCL.TO - Dividend Comparison

HUN.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQCL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.15%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
HUN.TO Global X Natural Gas ETF	0.00%	0.00%	12.17%	11.26%	5.52%	6.84%	9.49%	9.42%
QQCL.TO Global X Enhanced NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF	13.15%	14.54%	11.87%	3.68%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HUN.TO and QQCL.TO in my portfolio?

HUN.TO and QQCL.TO have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HUN.TO or QQCL.TO?

On fees, QQCL.TO 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, HUN.TO or QQCL.TO?

QQCL.TO is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.40% for HUN.TO.

What is the main difference between HUN.TO and QQCL.TO?

HUN.TO is categorized as Commodities, while QQCL.TO is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 1.40% for HUN.TO and 0.85% for QQCL.TO.