QDTE vs. AAPW
QDTE (Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) and AAPW (AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QDTE returned 34.41% vs 53.40% for AAPW. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QDTE charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for AAPW.
Performance
QDTE vs. AAPW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QDTE achieves a 12.44% return, which is significantly higher than AAPW's 11.28% return.
QDTE
- 1D
- 1.85%
- 1M
- 0.70%
- YTD
- 12.44%
- 6M
- 11.71%
- 1Y
- 34.41%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AAPW
- 1D
- -2.57%
- 1M
- 3.24%
- YTD
- 11.28%
- 6M
- 8.38%
- 1Y
- 53.40%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QDTE vs. AAPW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 12.44% | 12.59% |
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF | 11.28% | 8.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between QDTE and AAPW is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025 | 0.45 |
QDTE vs. AAPW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QDTE
AAPW
Financial Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
QDTE
AAPW
-
Basic Materials
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
Communication Services
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
Consumer Cyclical
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
Consumer Defensive
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
Energy
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
Healthcare
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
Industrials
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
Real Estate
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
Technology
QDTE
-
AAPW
Utilities
QDTE
-
AAPW
-
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
QDTE vs. AAPW — Risk / Return Rank
QDTE
AAPW
QDTE vs. AAPW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) and AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW). 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.
| QDTE | AAPW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.35 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.39 | 3.09 | +0.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.52 | 7.76 | +5.76 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QDTE | AAPW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.20 | 1.94 | +0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.17 | 0.45 | +0.72 |
Drawdowns
QDTE vs. AAPW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QDTE drawdown since its inception was -22.86%, smaller than the maximum AAPW drawdown of -36.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDTE and AAPW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QDTE | AAPW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.86% | -36.28% | +13.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.20% | -17.36% | +7.16% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.70% | -5.19% | +1.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.14% | -11.10% | +7.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.55% | 6.92% | -4.37% |
Volatility
QDTE vs. AAPW - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) is 6.57%, while AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) has a volatility of 6.96%. This indicates that QDTE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AAPW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QDTE | AAPW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.57% | 6.96% | -0.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.26% | 19.70% | -7.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.71% | 27.65% | -11.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.72% | 34.66% | -15.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.72% | 34.66% | -15.94% |
QDTE vs. AAPW - Expense Ratio Comparison
QDTE has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is lower than AAPW's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
QDTE vs. AAPW - Dividend Comparison
QDTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 44.14%, more than AAPW's 33.19% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF | 33.19% | 28.83% | 0.00% |
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF | 44.14% | 49.49% | 32.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QDTE and AAPW have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AAPW has higher volatility (6.96%) compared to QDTE (6.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDTE dropped -22.86% vs AAPW's -36.28%.
On 1-year performance, AAPW leads with 53.40% vs 34.41% for QDTE. On fees, QDTE is cheaper at 0.97% per year. On volatility, QDTE has been the lower-risk option at 6.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AAPW has performed better with a 53.40% return vs 34.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QDTE is cheaper with a 0.97% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AAPW.
QDTE has the higher dividend yield at 44.14%, compared with 33.19% for AAPW.
Their fees differ too: 0.97% for QDTE and 0.99% for AAPW.
QDTE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.94), 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.
Find the right allocation for QDTE and AAPW
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