MARO vs. QRMI
MARO (YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF) and QRMI (Global X NASDAQ 100 Risk Managed Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MARO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax, while QRMI is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Global X. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MARO returned -26.17% vs 9.73% for QRMI. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MARO charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QRMI.
Performance
MARO vs. QRMI - Performance Comparison
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*
- —
MARO vs. QRMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
MARO
QRMI
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.
| MARO | QRMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.43 | 1.71 | -2.14 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.27 | 2.30 | -2.57 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 1.35 | -0.38 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.40 | 1.94 | -2.34 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.68 | 8.52 | -9.20 |
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
| MARO | QRMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| MARO | QRMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -51.27% | 0.00% | -51.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.97% | -7.98% | -33.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| MARO | QRMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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