NFLW vs. MAGY
NFLW (Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF) and MAGY (Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NFLW returned -50.09% vs 3.73% for MAGY. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.99% expense ratio.
Performance
NFLW vs. MAGY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NFLW achieves a -27.54% return, which is significantly lower than MAGY's -7.53% return.
NFLW
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- -21.07%
- YTD
- -27.54%
- 6M
- -27.44%
- 1Y
- -50.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MAGY
- 1D
- -1.25%
- 1M
- -7.24%
- YTD
- -7.53%
- 6M
- -8.15%
- 1Y
- 3.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NFLW vs. MAGY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF | -27.54% | -29.54% |
MAGY Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF | -7.53% | 12.95% |
Correlation
The correlation between NFLW and MAGY is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025 | 0.17 |
NFLW vs. MAGY - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
NFLW
MAGY
Communication Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Communication Services
NFLW
MAGY
-
Basic Materials
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
Consumer Cyclical
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
Consumer Defensive
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
Energy
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
Financial Services
NFLW
-
MAGY
Healthcare
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
Industrials
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
Real Estate
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
Technology
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
Utilities
NFLW
-
MAGY
-
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
NFLW vs. MAGY — Risk / Return Rank
NFLW
MAGY
NFLW vs. MAGY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) and Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF (MAGY). 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 | MAGY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.40 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.75 | 1.06 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.93 | 0.26 | -1.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.59 | 0.81 | -2.40 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NFLW vs. MAGY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NFLW drawdown since its inception was -53.89%, which is greater than MAGY's maximum drawdown of -14.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NFLW and MAGY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NFLW | MAGY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.89% | -14.29% | -39.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -53.89% | -14.29% | -39.60% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -53.85% | -9.54% | -44.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -27.86% | -2.88% | -24.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 31.61% | 4.60% | +27.01% |
Volatility
NFLW vs. MAGY - Volatility Comparison
Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) has a higher volatility of 9.81% compared to Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF (MAGY) at 6.76%. This indicates that NFLW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MAGY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NFLW | MAGY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.81% | 6.76% | +3.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 30.49% | 12.65% | +17.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.43% | 15.38% | +25.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 40.29% | 15.45% | +24.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 40.29% | 15.45% | +24.84% |
NFLW vs. MAGY - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both NFLW and MAGY have an expense ratio of 0.99%.
Dividends
NFLW vs. MAGY - Dividend Comparison
NFLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 87.68%, more than MAGY's 40.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
MAGY Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF | 40.01% | 23.38% |
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF | 87.68% | 38.89% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NFLW and MAGY have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NFLW has higher volatility (9.81%) compared to MAGY (6.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NFLW dropped -53.89% vs MAGY's -14.29%.
On 1-year performance, MAGY leads with 3.73% vs -50.09% for NFLW. Both ETFs have the same 0.99% expense ratio. On volatility, MAGY has been the lower-risk option at 6.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MAGY has performed better with a 3.73% return vs -50.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NFLW and MAGY have the same expense ratio: 0.99% per year.
NFLW has the higher dividend yield at 87.68%, compared with 40.01% for MAGY.
MAGY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.24 vs -1.24), 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 NFLW and MAGY
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