QBY vs. OMAH
QBY (GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF) and OMAH (VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QBY charges 1.07%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for OMAH.
Performance
QBY vs. OMAH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QBY achieves a -25.71% return, which is significantly lower than OMAH's 5.13% return.
QBY
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- 1.45%
- YTD
- -25.71%
- 6M
- -31.55%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
OMAH
- 1D
- 0.54%
- 1M
- 0.72%
- YTD
- 5.13%
- 6M
- 5.28%
- 1Y
- 12.34%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QBY vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QBY GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF | -25.71% | -8.88% |
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF | 5.13% | 0.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between QBY and OMAH is 0.08, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 26, 2025 | 0.08 |
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
QBY vs. OMAH — Risk / Return Rank
QBY
OMAH
QBY vs. OMAH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF (QBY) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QBY | OMAH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 1.54 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -1.62 | 0.74 | -2.36 |
Drawdowns
QBY vs. OMAH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QBY drawdown since its inception was -38.93%, which is greater than OMAH's maximum drawdown of -11.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBY and OMAH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QBY | OMAH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.93% | -11.83% | -27.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -3.00% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -32.84% | -2.12% | -30.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.45% | -1.26% | -24.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.22% | — |
Volatility
QBY vs. OMAH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QBY | OMAH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.99% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 5.50% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.84% | 8.06% | +24.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.84% | 13.20% | +19.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.84% | 13.20% | +19.64% |
QBY vs. OMAH - Expense Ratio Comparison
QBY has a 1.07% expense ratio, which is higher than OMAH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
QBY vs. OMAH - Dividend Comparison
QBY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 100.94%, more than OMAH's 15.36% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF | 15.36% | 12.86% |
QBY GraniteShares YieldBOOST QBTS ETF | 100.94% | 15.05% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QBY and OMAH have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, OMAH is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
OMAH is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.07% for QBY.
QBY has the higher dividend yield at 100.94%, compared with 15.36% for OMAH.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and VistaShares. Their fees differ too: 1.07% for QBY and 0.95% for OMAH.
Find the right allocation for QBY and OMAH
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