NFLW vs. QDTE
NFLW (Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF) and QDTE (Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NFLW returned -48.89% vs 26.73% for QDTE. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NFLW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for QDTE.
Performance
NFLW vs. QDTE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NFLW achieves a -26.22% return, which is significantly lower than QDTE's 12.40% return.
NFLW
- 1D
- 0.85%
- 1M
- -7.21%
- 6M
- -20.56%
- YTD
- -26.22%
- 1Y
- -48.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QDTE
- 1D
- -1.63%
- 1M
- -1.88%
- 6M
- 11.11%
- YTD
- 12.40%
- 1Y
- 26.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NFLW vs. QDTE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF | -26.22% | -29.54% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 12.40% | 19.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between NFLW and QDTE is 0.10, 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 | 0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025 | 0.13 |
NFLW vs. QDTE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
NFLW
QDTE
Communication Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Communication Services
NFLW
QDTE
-
Basic Materials
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
Consumer Cyclical
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
Consumer Defensive
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
Energy
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
Financial Services
NFLW
-
QDTE
Healthcare
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
Industrials
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
Real Estate
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
Technology
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
Utilities
NFLW
-
QDTE
-
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. QDTE — Risk / Return Rank
NFLW
QDTE
NFLW vs. QDTE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) and Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE). 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 | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.74 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.94 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.76 | 1.27 | -0.51 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.94 | 2.63 | -3.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.59 | 9.81 | -11.40 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NFLW vs. QDTE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NFLW drawdown since its inception was -55.10%, which is greater than QDTE's maximum drawdown of -22.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NFLW and QDTE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NFLW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.10% | -22.86% | -32.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -52.27% | -10.20% | -42.07% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -53.01% | -3.74% | -49.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.35% | -3.12% | -26.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 30.82% | 2.73% | +28.09% |
Volatility
NFLW vs. QDTE - Volatility Comparison
Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF (NFLW) has a higher volatility of 13.72% compared to Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) at 7.02%. This indicates that NFLW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QDTE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NFLW | QDTE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.72% | 7.02% | +6.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 31.76% | 14.19% | +17.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.96% | 17.35% | +23.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 40.30% | 19.06% | +21.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 40.30% | 19.06% | +21.24% |
NFLW vs. QDTE - Expense Ratio Comparison
NFLW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than QDTE's 0.97% expense ratio.
Dividends
NFLW vs. QDTE - Dividend Comparison
NFLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 82.21%, more than QDTE's 46.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
NFLW Roundhill NFLX WeeklyPay ETF | 82.21% | 38.89% | 0.00% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 46.23% | 49.49% | 32.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NFLW and QDTE have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NFLW has higher volatility (13.72%) compared to QDTE (7.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NFLW dropped -55.10% vs QDTE's -22.86%.
On 1-year performance, QDTE leads with 26.73% vs -48.89% for NFLW. On fees, QDTE is cheaper at 0.97% per year. On volatility, QDTE has been the lower-risk option at 7.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QDTE has performed better with a 26.73% return vs -48.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QDTE is cheaper with a 0.97% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for NFLW.
NFLW has the higher dividend yield at 82.21%, compared with 46.23% for QDTE.
Their fees differ too: 0.99% for NFLW and 0.97% for QDTE.
QDTE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs -1.20), 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 QDTE
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