MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MPAY.TO (Global X Mid-Term U.S. Treasury Premium Yield ETF) and QQCC.TO (Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MPAY.TO is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Global X, while QQCC.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund managed by Global X. Over the past year, MPAY.TO returned 6.63% vs 35.05% for QQCC.TO. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MPAY.TO charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for QQCC.TO.

Performance

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Mid-Term U.S. Treasury Premium Yield ETF (MPAY.TO) and Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MPAY.TO achieves a 2.37% return, which is significantly lower than QQCC.TO's 16.94% return.

MPAY.TO

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 2.57%
• YTD: 2.37%
• 6M: 0.07%
• 1Y: 6.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQCC.TO

• 1D: 0.69%
• 1M: 10.18%
• YTD: 16.94%
• 6M: 14.76%
• 1Y: 35.05%
• 3Y*: 23.56%
• 5Y*: 15.67%
• 10Y*: 10.87%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MPAY.TO Global X Mid-Term U.S. Treasury Premium Yield ETF	2.37%	0.18%	7.40%	3.78%
QQCC.TO Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF	16.94%	11.64%	33.48%	5.27%

Correlation

The correlation between MPAY.TO and QQCC.TO is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2023	0.11

Return for Risk

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MPAY.TO

MPAY.TO Risk / Return Rank: 30
MPAY.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
MPAY.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
MPAY.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 31
MPAY.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
MPAY.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 25

QQCC.TO

QQCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 82
QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QQCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QQCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
QQCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
QQCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Mid-Term U.S. Treasury Premium Yield ETF (MPAY.TO) and Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO). 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.

	MPAY.TO	QQCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.14	2.76	-1.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.72	3.72	-2.00
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.50	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.36	4.32	-2.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.14	16.04	-12.91
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MPAY.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.14, which is lower than the QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MPAY.TO and QQCC.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MPAY.TO	QQCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.14	2.76	-1.62
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.90	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.74	0.00	+0.74

Drawdowns

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MPAY.TO drawdown since its inception was -7.95%, smaller than the maximum QQCC.TO drawdown of -36.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MPAY.TO and QQCC.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MPAY.TO	QQCC.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.95%	-36.70%	+28.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.88%	-8.15%	+3.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.24%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.24%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.70%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.43%	0.00%	-1.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.16%	-8.37%	+6.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	2.19%	-0.07%

Volatility

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Mid-Term U.S. Treasury Premium Yield ETF (MPAY.TO) is 1.80%, while Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) has a volatility of 3.75%. This indicates that MPAY.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MPAY.TO	QQCC.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.80%	3.75%	-1.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.41%	10.03%	-5.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.84%	12.78%	-6.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.03%	17.58%	-10.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.03%	17.29%	-10.26%

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MPAY.TO has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than QQCC.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

MPAY.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

MPAY.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.73%, less than QQCC.TO's 10.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MPAY.TO Global X Mid-Term U.S. Treasury Premium Yield ETF	8.73%	9.21%	9.12%	2.21%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQCC.TO Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF	10.48%	11.27%	9.89%	11.85%	11.04%	5.15%	5.84%	6.31%	7.90%	6.01%	6.73%	8.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MPAY.TO and QQCC.TO in my portfolio?

MPAY.TO and QQCC.TO have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MPAY.TO or QQCC.TO?

On fees, MPAY.TO is cheaper at 0.56% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MPAY.TO or QQCC.TO?

MPAY.TO is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for QQCC.TO.

What is the main difference between MPAY.TO and QQCC.TO?

MPAY.TO is categorized as Intermediate Core-Plus Bond, while QQCC.TO is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for MPAY.TO and 0.65% for QQCC.TO.