NIXT vs. QYLD

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

NIXT (Research Affiliates Deletions ETF) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NIXT is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Research Affiliates Deletions Index, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, NIXT returned 32.03% vs 19.97% for QYLD. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NIXT charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLD.

Performance

NIXT vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Research Affiliates Deletions ETF (NIXT) 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, NIXT achieves a 25.89% return, which is significantly higher than QYLD's 7.22% return.

NIXT

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 6.45%
• 6M: 20.40%
• YTD: 25.89%
• 1Y: 32.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.03%

QYLD

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: -2.71%
• 6M: 5.96%
• YTD: 7.22%
• 1Y: 19.97%
• 3Y*: 12.62%
• 5Y*: 7.90%
• 10Y*: 9.59%
• ALL TIME*: 8.55%

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

NIXT vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NIXT Research Affiliates Deletions ETF	25.89%	4.94%	4.60%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	7.22%	9.28%	9.78%

Correlation

The correlation between NIXT and QYLD is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2024	0.55

The correlation between NIXT and QYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NIXT vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

NIXT

NIXT Risk / Return Rank: 65
NIXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
NIXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
NIXT Omega Ratio Rank: 55
NIXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
NIXT Martin Ratio Rank: 70

QYLD

QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 85
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 85
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
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.

NIXT vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Research Affiliates Deletions ETF (NIXT) 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.

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.

	NIXT	QYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	1.86	-0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.26	2.62	-0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.38	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	4.04	-1.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.32	19.75	-10.43

NIXT vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NIXT Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is comparable to the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NIXT 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.

Drawdowns

NIXT vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NIXT drawdown since its inception was -27.75%, which is greater than QYLD's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NIXT and QYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	NIXT	QYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.75%	-24.75%	-3.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.71%	-4.97%	-6.74%
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	-1.29%	-3.37%	+2.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.64%	-3.81%	-1.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.45%	1.01%	+2.44%

Volatility

NIXT vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Research Affiliates Deletions ETF (NIXT) is 5.19%, while Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) has a volatility of 5.86%. This indicates that NIXT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NIXT	QYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.19%	5.86%	-0.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.63%	9.67%	+4.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.09%	10.83%	+10.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.02%	14.98%	+8.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.02%	15.60%	+7.42%

NIXT vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

NIXT has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

NIXT vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

NIXT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than QYLD's 12.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NIXT Research Affiliates Deletions ETF	1.30%	1.64%	1.39%	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	12.88%	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 NIXT and QYLD in my portfolio?

NIXT and QYLD have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NIXT or QYLD?

QYLD has higher volatility (5.86%) compared to NIXT (5.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NIXT dropped -27.75% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, NIXT or QYLD?

On 1-year performance, NIXT leads with 32.03% vs 19.97% for QYLD. On fees, NIXT is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, NIXT has been the lower-risk option at 5.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NIXT or QYLD?

Over the 1-year period, NIXT has performed better with a 32.03% return vs 19.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NIXT or QYLD?

NIXT is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLD.

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

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 12.88%, compared with 1.30% for NIXT.

What is the main difference between NIXT and QYLD?

NIXT is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. NIXT tracks Research Affiliates Deletions Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. They also come from different issuers: Research Affiliates and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for NIXT and 0.60% for QYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.53), 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.