OARK vs. QYLG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

OARK (YieldMax Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF) and QYLG (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OARK is a Options Trading fund actively managed by YieldMax, while QYLG is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite V2 Index. OARK is actively managed, while QYLG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, OARK returned 15.03%/yr vs 21.27%/yr for QYLG. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. OARK charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLG.

Performance

OARK vs. QYLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF (OARK) and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OARK achieves a 7.89% return, which is significantly lower than QYLG's 14.51% return.

OARK

• 1D: 1.68%
• 1M: 3.49%
• YTD: 7.89%
• 6M: 4.40%
• 1Y: 35.59%
• 3Y*: 15.03%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QYLG

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 5.26%
• YTD: 14.51%
• 6M: 14.65%
• 1Y: 32.36%
• 3Y*: 21.27%
• 5Y*: 13.14%
• 10Y*: —

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

OARK vs. QYLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
OARK YieldMax Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF	7.89%	20.37%	7.32%	20.12%	-9.11%
QYLG Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF	14.51%	15.29%	22.02%	38.73%	-5.17%

Correlation

The correlation between OARK and QYLG is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 25, 2022	0.69

The correlation between OARK and QYLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

OARK vs. QYLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

OARK

OARK Risk / Return Rank: 33
OARK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
OARK Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
OARK Omega Ratio Rank: 33
OARK Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
OARK Martin Ratio Rank: 27

QYLG

QYLG Risk / Return Rank: 82
QYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 82
QYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
QYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

OARK vs. QYLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF (OARK) and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG). 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.

	OARK	QYLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.27	2.67	-1.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.79	3.63	-1.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.49	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.54	3.86	-2.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.65	17.59	-13.95
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OARK vs. QYLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OARK Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is lower than the QYLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OARK and QYLG, 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

	OARK	QYLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.27	2.67	-1.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.73	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	0.83	-0.41

Drawdowns

OARK vs. QYLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OARK drawdown since its inception was -35.48%, which is greater than QYLG's maximum drawdown of -29.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OARK and QYLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	OARK	QYLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.48%	-29.98%	-5.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.26%	-8.42%	-14.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.48%	-20.75%	-14.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.98%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.18%	-0.25%	-4.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.58%	-6.42%	-4.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.78%	1.84%	+7.94%

Volatility

OARK vs. QYLG - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF (OARK) has a higher volatility of 6.52% compared to Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG) at 3.10%. This indicates that OARK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OARK	QYLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.52%	3.10%	+3.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.98%	9.68%	+10.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.05%	12.16%	+15.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.84%	17.97%	+12.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.84%	17.92%	+12.92%

OARK vs. QYLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

OARK has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than QYLG's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

OARK vs. QYLG - Dividend Comparison

OARK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 64.68%, more than QYLG's 16.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
OARK YieldMax Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF	64.68%	61.86%	47.86%	45.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QYLG Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF	16.11%	17.93%	25.27%	5.43%	6.91%	10.15%	1.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OARK and QYLG in my portfolio?

OARK and QYLG have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OARK or QYLG?

OARK has higher volatility (6.52%) compared to QYLG (3.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OARK dropped -35.48% vs QYLG's -29.98%.

Which ETF is better, OARK or QYLG?

On 3-year performance, QYLG leads with 21.27% vs 15.03% for OARK. On fees, QYLG is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QYLG has been the lower-risk option at 3.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OARK or QYLG?

Over the 3-year period, QYLG has performed better with a 21.27% return vs 15.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OARK or QYLG?

QYLG is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for OARK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OARK or QYLG?

OARK has the higher dividend yield at 64.68%, compared with 16.11% for QYLG.

What is the main difference between OARK and QYLG?

OARK is categorized as Options Trading, while QYLG is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for OARK and 0.60% for QYLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 1.27), 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.