NFLW vs. AAPW

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

NFLW (Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF) and AAPW (AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NFLW returned -53.96% vs 66.79% for AAPW. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.99% expense ratio.

Performance

NFLW vs. AAPW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) and AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NFLW achieves a -32.00% return, which is significantly lower than AAPW's 25.39% return.

NFLW

• 1D: -7.83%
• 1M: -12.20%
• 6M: -26.55%
• YTD: -32.00%
• 1Y: -53.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AAPW

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: 14.37%
• 6M: 35.28%
• YTD: 25.39%
• 1Y: 66.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NFLW vs. AAPW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF	-32.00%	-29.54%
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	25.39%	45.20%

Correlation

The correlation between NFLW and AAPW is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.17

NFLW vs. AAPW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NFLW	AAPW
Communication Services	12.8%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	13.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

NFLW vs. AAPW — Risk / Return Rank

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

NFLW

NFLW Risk / Return Rank: 0
NFLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
NFLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
NFLW Omega Ratio Rank: 0
NFLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
NFLW Martin Ratio Rank: 0

AAPW

AAPW Risk / Return Rank: 82
AAPW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
AAPW Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
AAPW Omega Ratio Rank: 84
AAPW Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
AAPW Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

NFLW vs. AAPW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) and AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	NFLW	AAPW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.30	2.27	-3.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.16	3.02	-5.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.73	1.39	-0.66
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-1.02	3.88	-4.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.80	9.26	-11.06

NFLW vs. AAPW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NFLW Sharpe Ratio is -1.30, which is lower than the AAPW Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NFLW and AAPW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

NFLW vs. AAPW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NFLW drawdown since its inception was -56.69%, which is greater than AAPW's maximum drawdown of -36.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NFLW and AAPW.

Drawdown Indicators

	NFLW	AAPW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.69%	-36.28%	-20.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.13%	-17.36%	-35.77%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-56.69%	0.00%	-56.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.45%	-10.66%	-18.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	31.00%	7.27%	+23.73%

Volatility

NFLW vs. AAPW - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) has a higher volatility of 15.26% compared to AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) at 11.79%. This indicates that NFLW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AAPW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NFLW	AAPW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.26%	11.79%	+3.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.70%	22.95%	+9.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	41.66%	29.64%	+12.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	40.89%	34.98%	+5.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.89%	34.98%	+5.91%

NFLW vs. AAPW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NFLW and AAPW have an expense ratio of 0.99%.

Dividends

NFLW vs. AAPW - Dividend Comparison

NFLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 89.19%, more than AAPW's 27.83% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	27.83%	28.83%
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF	89.19%	38.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NFLW and AAPW in my portfolio?

NFLW and AAPW have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NFLW or AAPW?

NFLW has higher volatility (15.26%) compared to AAPW (11.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NFLW dropped -56.69% vs AAPW's -36.28%.

Which ETF is better, NFLW or AAPW?

On 1-year performance, AAPW leads with 66.79% vs -53.96% for NFLW. Both ETFs have the same 0.99% expense ratio. On volatility, AAPW has been the lower-risk option at 11.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NFLW or AAPW?

Over the 1-year period, AAPW has performed better with a 66.79% return vs -53.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NFLW or AAPW?

NFLW and AAPW have the same expense ratio: 0.99% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NFLW or AAPW?

NFLW has the higher dividend yield at 89.19%, compared with 27.83% for AAPW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AAPW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs -1.30), 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.