QDTE vs. FLDR

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

QDTE (Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) and FLDR (Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QDTE is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Roundhill, while FLDR is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Fidelity Low Duration Investment Grade Factor Index. QDTE is actively managed, while FLDR is passively managed. Over the past year, QDTE returned 34.41% vs 4.67% for FLDR. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QDTE charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FLDR.

Performance

QDTE vs. FLDR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDTE achieves a 12.44% return, which is significantly higher than FLDR's 1.37% return.

QDTE

• 1D: 1.85%
• 1M: 0.70%
• YTD: 12.44%
• 6M: 11.71%
• 1Y: 34.41%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLDR

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.23%
• YTD: 1.37%
• 6M: 1.74%
• 1Y: 4.67%
• 3Y*: 5.32%
• 5Y*: 3.67%
• 10Y*: —

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

QDTE vs. FLDR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	12.44%	19.32%	16.07%
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF	1.37%	5.41%	4.45%

Correlation

The correlation between QDTE and FLDR is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 8, 2024	0.09

Return for Risk

QDTE vs. FLDR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDTE

QDTE Risk / Return Rank: 74
QDTE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
QDTE Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
QDTE Omega Ratio Rank: 74
QDTE Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
QDTE Martin Ratio Rank: 78

FLDR

FLDR Risk / Return Rank: 98
FLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
FLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
FLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 99
FLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

QDTE vs. FLDR - 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 Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). 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	FLDR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.20	5.83	-3.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	9.84	-7.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	2.70	-1.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.39	10.04	-6.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.52	68.61	-55.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QDTE vs. FLDR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDTE Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is lower than the FLDR Sharpe Ratio of 5.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDTE and FLDR, 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

	QDTE	FLDR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.20	5.83	-3.62
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	3.05	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.17	0.61	+0.56

Drawdowns

QDTE vs. FLDR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDTE drawdown since its inception was -22.86%, which is greater than FLDR's maximum drawdown of -12.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDTE and FLDR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDTE	FLDR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.86%	-12.23%	-10.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.20%	-0.47%	-9.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.76%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-2.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.70%	-0.08%	-3.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.14%	-0.35%	-2.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.55%	0.07%	+2.48%

Volatility

QDTE vs. FLDR - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) has a higher volatility of 6.57% compared to Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) at 0.19%. This indicates that QDTE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLDR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDTE	FLDR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.57%	0.19%	+6.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.26%	0.59%	+11.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.71%	0.81%	+14.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.72%	1.21%	+17.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.72%	5.26%	+13.46%

QDTE vs. FLDR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDTE has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than FLDR's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDTE vs. FLDR - Dividend Comparison

QDTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 44.14%, more than FLDR's 4.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF	4.43%	4.66%	5.50%	5.28%	2.09%	0.51%	1.22%	2.69%	1.38%
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	44.14%	49.49%	32.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDTE and FLDR in my portfolio?

QDTE and FLDR have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QDTE or FLDR?

QDTE has higher volatility (6.57%) compared to FLDR (0.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDTE dropped -22.86% vs FLDR's -12.23%.

Which ETF is better, QDTE or FLDR?

On 1-year performance, QDTE leads with 34.41% vs 4.67% for FLDR. On fees, FLDR is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLDR has been the lower-risk option at 0.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QDTE or FLDR?

Over the 1-year period, QDTE has performed better with a 34.41% return vs 4.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDTE or FLDR?

FLDR is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for QDTE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QDTE or FLDR?

QDTE has the higher dividend yield at 44.14%, compared with 4.43% for FLDR.

What is the main difference between QDTE and FLDR?

QDTE is categorized as Derivative Income, while FLDR is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for QDTE and 0.15% for FLDR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.83 vs 2.20), 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.