PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MARO vs. QRMI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MARO vs. QRMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Risk Managed Income ETF (QRMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MARO achieves a 27.88% return, which is significantly higher than QRMI's 2.60% return.


MARO

1D
-2.22%
1M
12.47%
YTD
27.88%
6M
-0.14%
1Y
-26.17%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QRMI

1D
0.20%
1M
1.85%
YTD
2.60%
6M
3.95%
1Y
9.73%
3Y*
7.02%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MARO vs. QRMI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MARO
YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF
27.88%-48.05%-19.61%
QRMI
Global X NASDAQ 100 Risk Managed Income ETF
2.60%3.76%2.60%

Correlation

The correlation between MARO and QRMI is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2024

0.36

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

MARO vs. QRMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

MARO
MARO Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
MARO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MARO Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
MARO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
MARO Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
MARO Martin Ratio Rank: 66
Martin Ratio Rank

QRMI
QRMI Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
QRMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QRMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
QRMI Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
QRMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
QRMI Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
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.

MARO vs. QRMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Risk Managed Income ETF (QRMI). 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.


MAROQRMIDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-0.43

1.71

-2.14

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-0.27

2.30

-2.57

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.97

1.35

-0.38

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.40

1.94

-2.34

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-0.68

8.52

-9.20

MARO vs. QRMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MARO Sharpe Ratio is -0.43, which is lower than the QRMI Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MARO and QRMI, 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


MAROQRMIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.43

1.71

-2.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.54

0.22

-0.76

Drawdowns

MARO vs. QRMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MARO drawdown since its inception was -71.75%, which is greater than QRMI's maximum drawdown of -20.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARO and QRMI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MAROQRMIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.75%

-20.95%

-50.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-65.51%

-5.04%

-60.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-51.27%

0.00%

-51.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-41.97%

-7.98%

-33.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

38.58%

1.14%

+37.44%

Volatility

MARO vs. QRMI - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) has a higher volatility of 11.56% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Risk Managed Income ETF (QRMI) at 0.66%. This indicates that MARO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QRMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MAROQRMIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.56%

0.66%

+10.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

46.34%

4.43%

+41.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

61.49%

5.76%

+55.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

65.15%

8.34%

+56.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

65.15%

8.34%

+56.81%

MARO vs. QRMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

MARO has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than QRMI's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

MARO vs. QRMI - Dividend Comparison

MARO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 183.99%, more than QRMI's 12.19% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
MARO
YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF
183.99%277.68%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QRMI
Global X NASDAQ 100 Risk Managed Income ETF
12.19%12.28%11.80%12.44%10.65%3.36%

Frequently Asked Questions


MARO and QRMI have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MARO has higher volatility (11.56%) compared to QRMI (0.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MARO dropped -71.75% vs QRMI's -20.95%.

On 1-year performance, QRMI leads with 9.73% vs -26.17% for MARO. On fees, QRMI is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QRMI has been the lower-risk option at 0.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QRMI has performed better with a 9.73% return vs -26.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QRMI is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for MARO.

MARO has the higher dividend yield at 183.99%, compared with 12.19% for QRMI.

MARO is categorized as Derivative Income, while QRMI is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for MARO and 0.60% for QRMI.

QRMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs -0.43), 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 MARO and QRMI

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