MST vs. QYLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MST (Defiance Leveraged Long Income MSTR ETF) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MST is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Defiance, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. MST is actively managed, while QYLD is passively managed. Over the past year, MST returned -92.85% vs 23.93% for QYLD. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MST charges 1.31%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLD.

Performance

MST vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Defiance Leveraged Long Income MSTR ETF (MST) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MST achieves a -46.90% return, which is significantly lower than QYLD's 7.88% return.

MST

• 1D: -14.62%
• 1M: -51.85%
• YTD: -46.90%
• 6M: -62.90%
• 1Y: -92.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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)

MST vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MST Defiance Leveraged Long Income MSTR ETF	-46.90%	-87.72%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	7.88%	16.96%

Correlation

The correlation between MST and QYLD is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2025	0.41

Return for Risk

MST vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

MST

MST Risk / Return Rank: 1
MST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
MST Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
MST Omega Ratio Rank: 1
MST Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
MST Martin Ratio Rank: 3

QYLD

QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 88
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 92
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

MST vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Leveraged Long Income MSTR ETF (MST) 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.

	MST	QYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.74	2.80	-3.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.01	3.92	-5.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	1.63	-0.85
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.98	4.84	-5.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.28	28.36	-29.64
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MST vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MST Sharpe Ratio is -0.74, which is lower than the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MST 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MST	QYLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.74	2.80	-3.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.58	—
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	0.59	-1.34

Drawdowns

MST vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MST drawdown since its inception was -94.99%, which is greater than QYLD's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MST and QYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	MST	QYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.99%	-24.75%	-70.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-94.99%	-4.97%	-90.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.06%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-24.75%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.34%	-0.06%	-94.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-62.22%	-3.84%	-58.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	72.32%	0.85%	+71.47%

Volatility

MST vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

Defiance Leveraged Long Income MSTR ETF (MST) has a higher volatility of 35.73% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 1.85%. This indicates that MST'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.

Volatility by Period

	MST	QYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	35.73%	1.85%	+33.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	101.54%	7.12%	+94.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	126.60%	8.58%	+118.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	123.87%	14.70%	+109.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	123.87%	15.49%	+108.38%

MST vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

MST has a 1.31% expense ratio, which is higher than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

MST vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

MST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 891.75%, more than QYLD's 11.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MST Defiance Leveraged Long Income MSTR ETF	891.75%	381.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both MST and QYLD in my portfolio?

MST and QYLD have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MST or QYLD?

MST has higher volatility (35.73%) compared to QYLD (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MST dropped -94.99% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, MST or QYLD?

On 1-year performance, QYLD leads with 23.93% vs -92.85% for MST. On fees, QYLD is cheaper at 0.60% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, MST or QYLD?

Over the 1-year period, QYLD has performed better with a 23.93% return vs -92.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MST or QYLD?

QYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 1.31% for MST.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MST or QYLD?

MST has the higher dividend yield at 891.75%, compared with 11.46% for QYLD.

What is the main difference between MST and QYLD?

MST is categorized as Derivative Income, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Defiance and Global X. Their fees differ too: 1.31% for MST and 0.60% for QYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs -0.74), 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.