PEPS vs. RYLG

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PEPS (Parametric Equity Plus ETF) and RYLG (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. PEPS is actively managed, while RYLG is passively managed. Over the past year, PEPS returned 33.38% vs 32.92% for RYLG. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PEPS charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RYLG.

Performance

PEPS vs. RYLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Parametric Equity Plus ETF (PEPS) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PEPS achieves a 11.24% return, which is significantly lower than RYLG's 13.55% return.

PEPS

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 6.48%
• YTD: 11.24%
• 6M: 11.73%
• 1Y: 33.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RYLG

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: 4.10%
• YTD: 13.55%
• 6M: 14.59%
• 1Y: 32.92%
• 3Y*: 12.91%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PEPS vs. RYLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PEPS Parametric Equity Plus ETF	11.24%	20.32%	-1.45%
RYLG Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF	13.55%	9.39%	-3.85%

Correlation

The correlation between PEPS and RYLG is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2024	0.80

The correlation between PEPS and RYLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PEPS vs. RYLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PEPS

PEPS Risk / Return Rank: 75
PEPS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
PEPS Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
PEPS Omega Ratio Rank: 77
PEPS Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
PEPS Martin Ratio Rank: 81

RYLG

RYLG Risk / Return Rank: 70
RYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
RYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
RYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 63
RYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
RYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

PEPS vs. RYLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Parametric Equity Plus ETF (PEPS) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG). 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.

	PEPS	RYLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	2.23	+0.34
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.36	3.11	+0.25
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.39	+0.08
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.46	4.04	-0.58
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	16.23	15.60	+0.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PEPS vs. RYLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PEPS Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the RYLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PEPS and RYLG, 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

	PEPS	RYLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	2.23	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.07	0.65	+0.43

Drawdowns

PEPS vs. RYLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PEPS drawdown since its inception was -21.26%, roughly equal to the maximum RYLG drawdown of -22.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PEPS and RYLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PEPS	RYLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.26%	-22.37%	+1.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.80%	-8.18%	-1.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.37%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.78%	-4.14%	+1.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	2.12%	-0.03%

Volatility

PEPS vs. RYLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Parametric Equity Plus ETF (PEPS) is 2.75%, while Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) has a volatility of 3.81%. This indicates that PEPS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RYLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PEPS	RYLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.75%	3.81%	-1.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.82%	10.64%	-0.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.05%	14.84%	-1.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.32%	17.17%	+1.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.32%	17.17%	+1.15%

PEPS vs. RYLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PEPS has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than RYLG's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

PEPS vs. RYLG - Dividend Comparison

PEPS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than RYLG's 10.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
PEPS Parametric Equity Plus ETF	0.88%	1.00%	0.17%	0.00%	0.00%
RYLG Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF	10.24%	10.82%	23.73%	5.78%	4.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PEPS and RYLG in my portfolio?

PEPS and RYLG have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PEPS or RYLG?

RYLG has higher volatility (3.81%) compared to PEPS (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PEPS dropped -21.26% vs RYLG's -22.37%.

Which ETF is better, PEPS or RYLG?

On 1-year performance, PEPS leads with 33.38% vs 32.92% for RYLG. On fees, PEPS is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, PEPS has been the lower-risk option at 2.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PEPS or RYLG?

Over the 1-year period, PEPS has performed better with a 33.38% return vs 32.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PEPS or RYLG?

PEPS is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RYLG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PEPS or RYLG?

RYLG has the higher dividend yield at 10.24%, compared with 0.88% for PEPS.

What is the main difference between PEPS and RYLG?

They also come from different issuers: Parametric and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for PEPS and 0.35% for RYLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PEPS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 2.23), 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.