LQTI vs. GLDW
LQTI (FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF) and GLDW (Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LQTI charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for GLDW.
Performance
LQTI vs. GLDW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQTI achieves a 0.16% return, which is significantly lower than GLDW's 1.00% return.
LQTI
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- 0.41%
- YTD
- 0.16%
- 6M
- -0.04%
- 1Y
- 5.69%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GLDW
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- -2.48%
- YTD
- 1.00%
- 6M
- 3.47%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LQTI vs. GLDW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF | 0.16% | 0.27% |
GLDW Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF | 1.00% | 7.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQTI and GLDW is 0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2025 | 0.10 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
LQTI vs. GLDW — Risk / Return Rank
LQTI
GLDW
LQTI vs. GLDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) and Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF (GLDW). 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.
| LQTI | GLDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.68 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.15 | — | — |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LQTI | GLDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.12 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.88 | 0.42 | +0.46 |
Drawdowns
LQTI vs. GLDW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQTI drawdown since its inception was -3.41%, smaller than the maximum GLDW drawdown of -23.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQTI and GLDW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQTI | GLDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.41% | -23.59% | +20.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.41% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.44% | -22.51% | +21.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.88% | -8.93% | +8.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.11% | — | — |
Volatility
LQTI vs. GLDW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQTI | GLDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.65% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.02% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.10% | 36.90% | -31.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.97% | 36.90% | -30.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.97% | 36.90% | -30.93% |
LQTI vs. GLDW - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQTI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than GLDW's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
LQTI vs. GLDW - Dividend Comparison
LQTI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.11%, less than GLDW's 19.48% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
GLDW Roundhill Gold WeeklyPay ETF | 19.48% | 3.75% |
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF | 9.11% | 7.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LQTI and GLDW have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for GLDW.
GLDW has the higher dividend yield at 19.48%, compared with 9.11% for LQTI.
They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for LQTI and 0.99% for GLDW.
Find the right allocation for LQTI and GLDW
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