PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MLPX vs. QYLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MLPX vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MLPX achieves a 23.59% return, which is significantly higher than QYLD's 7.88% return. Over the past 10 years, MLPX has outperformed QYLD with an annualized return of 12.41%, while QYLD has yielded a comparatively lower 9.80% annualized return.


MLPX

1D
-0.39%
1M
-2.15%
YTD
23.59%
6M
23.51%
1Y
22.94%
3Y*
28.13%
5Y*
20.92%
10Y*
12.41%

QYLD

1D
-0.06%
1M
1.62%
YTD
7.88%
6M
9.97%
1Y
23.93%
3Y*
13.80%
5Y*
8.43%
10Y*
9.80%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MLPX vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MLPX
Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF
23.59%4.96%42.90%15.77%21.54%39.63%-20.32%19.04%-15.64%-4.53%
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
7.88%9.28%19.35%22.77%-19.08%10.41%8.72%22.69%-3.07%18.79%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPX and QYLD is -0.08, 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.08

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.17

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2013

0.36

The correlation between MLPX and QYLD shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (1 year) to 0.36 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MLPX vs. QYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MLPX
QYLD

Energy

99.5%
0.6%

Utilities

0.3%
1.4%

Basic Materials

-

1.1%

Communication Services

-

15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

7.7%

Financial Services

-

0.2%

Healthcare

-

4.2%

Industrials

-

2.8%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Technology

-

53.8%

Energy

MLPX
99.5%
QYLD
0.6%

Utilities

MLPX
0.3%
QYLD
1.4%

Basic Materials

MLPX

-

QYLD
1.1%

Communication Services

MLPX

-

QYLD
15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

MLPX

-

QYLD
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

MLPX

-

QYLD
7.7%

Financial Services

MLPX

-

QYLD
0.2%

Healthcare

MLPX

-

QYLD
4.2%

Industrials

MLPX

-

QYLD
2.8%

Real Estate

MLPX

-

QYLD
0.1%

Technology

MLPX

-

QYLD
53.8%

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

MLPX vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

MLPX
MLPX Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
MLPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MLPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
MLPX Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
MLPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
MLPX Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

QYLD
QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
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.

MLPX vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). 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.


MLPXQYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.63

-0.37

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.82

4.84

-2.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.27

28.36

-21.09

MLPX vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPX Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is lower than the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPX and QYLD, 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


MLPXQYLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.50

2.80

-1.30

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.05

0.58

+0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

0.63

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.35

0.59

-0.24

Drawdowns

MLPX vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPX drawdown since its inception was -70.67%, which is greater than QYLD's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPX and QYLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MLPXQYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-70.67%

-24.75%

-45.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.18%

-4.97%

-3.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.77%

-19.06%

+2.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.72%

-24.61%

+4.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-64.70%

-24.75%

-39.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.68%

-0.06%

-5.62%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.63%

-3.84%

-12.79%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.17%

0.85%

+2.32%

Volatility

MLPX vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) has a higher volatility of 6.41% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 1.85%. This indicates that MLPX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MLPXQYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.41%

1.85%

+4.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.84%

7.12%

+4.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.38%

8.58%

+6.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.08%

14.70%

+5.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.50%

15.49%

+11.01%

MLPX vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPX has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

MLPX vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

MLPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.15%, less than QYLD's 11.46% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MLPX
Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF
4.15%4.88%4.30%5.22%5.23%5.98%8.32%5.78%5.77%4.36%5.50%4.81%
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
11.46%11.55%12.50%11.78%13.75%12.85%11.16%9.84%12.44%7.69%9.15%9.42%

Frequently Asked Questions


MLPX and QYLD have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MLPX has higher volatility (6.41%) compared to QYLD (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPX dropped -70.67% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

On 10-year performance, MLPX leads with 12.41% vs 9.80% for QYLD. On fees, MLPX is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, QYLD has been the lower-risk option at 1.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, MLPX has performed better with a 12.41% return vs 9.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MLPX is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.46%, compared with 4.15% for MLPX.

MLPX is categorized as MLPs, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. MLPX tracks Solactive MLP & Energy Infrastructure Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for MLPX and 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.50), 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 MLPX and QYLD

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