PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MAGC vs. PLTW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MAGC vs. PLTW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) and PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF (PLTW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MAGC achieves a -15.36% return, which is significantly higher than PLTW's -19.95% return.


MAGC

1D
4.10%
1M
-2.34%
YTD
-15.36%
6M
-17.67%
1Y
-15.61%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

PLTW

1D
-6.41%
1M
6.00%
YTD
-19.95%
6M
-16.70%
1Y
8.66%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MAGC vs. PLTW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
MAGC
Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF
-15.36%-6.47%
PLTW
PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF
-19.95%59.45%

Correlation

The correlation between MAGC and PLTW is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.17

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025

0.19

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

MAGC vs. PLTW — Risk / Return Rank

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

MAGC
MAGC Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
MAGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MAGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
MAGC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
MAGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
MAGC Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank

PLTW
PLTW Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
PLTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PLTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
PLTW Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
PLTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
PLTW Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
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.

MAGC vs. PLTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) and PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF (PLTW). 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.


MAGCPLTWDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-0.59

0.14

-0.73

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-0.73

0.61

-1.34

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.92

1.08

-0.16

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.44

0.20

-0.64

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-0.85

0.36

-1.21

MAGC vs. PLTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAGC Sharpe Ratio is -0.59, which is lower than the PLTW Sharpe Ratio of 0.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAGC and PLTW, 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


MAGCPLTWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.59

0.14

-0.73

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.29

0.29

-0.58

Drawdowns

MAGC vs. PLTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAGC drawdown since its inception was -32.86%, smaller than the maximum PLTW drawdown of -46.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGC and PLTW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MAGCPLTWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.86%

-46.29%

+13.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-32.86%

-46.29%

+13.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-28.88%

-34.53%

+5.65%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.12%

-19.50%

+4.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

16.98%

25.08%

-8.10%

Volatility

MAGC vs. PLTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) is 10.63%, while PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF (PLTW) has a volatility of 20.80%. This indicates that MAGC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PLTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MAGCPLTWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.63%

20.80%

-10.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.54%

45.56%

-26.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.65%

61.22%

-34.57%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

34.36%

72.61%

-38.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

34.36%

72.61%

-38.25%

MAGC vs. PLTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

MAGC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than PLTW's 0.99% expense ratio.


Dividends

MAGC vs. PLTW - Dividend Comparison

MAGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.85%, less than PLTW's 111.82% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
MAGC
Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF
4.85%4.10%1.02%
PLTW
PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF
111.82%72.40%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MAGC and PLTW have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PLTW has higher volatility (20.80%) compared to MAGC (10.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGC dropped -32.86% vs PLTW's -46.29%.

On 1-year performance, PLTW leads with 8.66% vs -15.61% for MAGC. On fees, MAGC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, MAGC has been the lower-risk option at 10.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, PLTW has performed better with a 8.66% return vs -15.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MAGC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for PLTW.

PLTW has the higher dividend yield at 111.82%, compared with 4.85% for MAGC.

MAGC is categorized as China Equities, while PLTW is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for MAGC and 0.99% for PLTW.

PLTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.14 vs -0.59), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MAGC and PLTW

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