QBY vs. AMDW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

QBY (GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF) and AMDW (Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.44 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. QBY charges 1.07%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for AMDW.

Performance

QBY vs. AMDW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF (QBY) and Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF (AMDW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBY achieves a -34.18% return, which is significantly lower than AMDW's 146.74% return.

QBY

• 1D: 0.36%
• 1M: -9.83%
• 6M: -17.89%
• YTD: -34.18%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

AMDW

• 1D: -2.02%
• 1M: -10.13%
• 6M: 119.90%
• YTD: 146.74%
• 1Y: 209.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 229.60%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
AMDW Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF	$10.26M	$9.58M	$8.51M
QBY GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF	$136.73K	$120.85K	$134.30K

QBY vs. AMDW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QBY GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF	-34.18%	-8.88%
AMDW Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF	146.74%	-0.86%

Correlation

The correlation between QBY and AMDW is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 25, 2025	0.44

Return for Risk

QBY vs. AMDW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QBY

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

AMDW

AMDW Risk / Return Rank: 88
AMDW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
AMDW Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
AMDW Omega Ratio Rank: 84
AMDW Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
AMDW Martin Ratio Rank: 84

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QBY vs. AMDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF (QBY) and Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF (AMDW). 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.

	QBY	AMDW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.36	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.92	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.36	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	5.83	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	11.47	—

Drawdowns

QBY vs. AMDW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBY drawdown since its inception was -41.40%, which is greater than AMDW's maximum drawdown of -34.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBY and AMDW.

Drawdown Indicators

	QBY	AMDW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.40%	-34.64%	-6.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-34.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.49%	-21.39%	-19.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-27.81%	-13.97%	-13.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	17.59%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QBY	AMDW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	28.87%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	67.40%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.94%	85.70%	-55.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.94%	85.05%	-55.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.94%	85.05%	-55.11%

QBY vs. AMDW - Expense Ratio Comparison

QBY has a 1.07% expense ratio, which is higher than AMDW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

QBY vs. AMDW - Dividend Comparison

QBY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 153.94%, more than AMDW's 53.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AMDW Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF	53.42%	34.78%
QBY GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF	153.94%	15.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QBY and AMDW in my portfolio?

QBY and AMDW have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QBY or AMDW?

On fees, AMDW is cheaper at 0.99% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QBY or AMDW?

AMDW is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.07% for QBY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QBY or AMDW?

QBY has the higher dividend yield at 153.94%, compared with 53.42% for AMDW.

What is the main difference between QBY and AMDW?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 1.07% for QBY and 0.99% for AMDW.