QDTE vs. OMAH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QDTE (Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) and OMAH (VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QDTE returned 40.36% vs 11.44% for OMAH. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QDTE charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for OMAH.

Performance

QDTE vs. OMAH - 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 VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDTE achieves a 16.58% return, which is significantly higher than OMAH's 4.56% return.

QDTE

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 8.99%
• YTD: 16.58%
• 6M: 16.20%
• 1Y: 40.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

OMAH

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 0.44%
• YTD: 4.56%
• 6M: 4.00%
• 1Y: 11.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QDTE vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	16.58%	20.37%
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	4.56%	6.74%

Correlation

The correlation between QDTE and OMAH is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2025	0.44

The correlation between QDTE and OMAH shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (1 year) to 0.44 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QDTE vs. OMAH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QDTE	OMAH
Financial Services	5.4%	38.9%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	9.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	16.2%
Energy	-	10.5%
Healthcare	-	7.0%
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	13.6%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

QDTE vs. OMAH — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDTE

QDTE Risk / Return Rank: 78
QDTE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
QDTE Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
QDTE Omega Ratio Rank: 78
QDTE Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
QDTE Martin Ratio Rank: 80

OMAH

OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 49
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 37
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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. OMAH - 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 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.

	QDTE	OMAH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	1.43	+1.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.49	2.02	+1.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.25	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.98	3.82	+0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.08	9.48	+6.60
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. OMAH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDTE Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is higher than the OMAH Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDTE and OMAH, 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	OMAH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.74	1.43	+1.31
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.30	0.70	+0.60

Drawdowns

QDTE vs. OMAH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDTE drawdown since its inception was -22.86%, which is greater than OMAH's maximum drawdown of -11.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDTE and OMAH.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDTE	OMAH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.86%	-11.83%	-11.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.20%	-3.00%	-7.20%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.16%	-2.65%	+2.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.14%	-1.26%	-1.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.52%	1.21%	+1.31%

Volatility

QDTE vs. OMAH - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) has a higher volatility of 3.75% compared to VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) at 1.93%. This indicates that QDTE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OMAH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDTE	OMAH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.75%	1.93%	+1.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.01%	5.49%	+5.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.81%	8.05%	+6.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.43%	13.21%	+5.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.43%	13.21%	+5.22%

QDTE vs. OMAH - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDTE has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than OMAH's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDTE vs. OMAH - Dividend Comparison

QDTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 42.16%, more than OMAH's 15.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	15.44%	12.86%	0.00%
QDTE Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	42.16%	49.49%	32.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDTE and OMAH in my portfolio?

QDTE and OMAH have a correlation of 0.30, 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 OMAH?

QDTE has higher volatility (3.75%) compared to OMAH (1.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDTE dropped -22.86% vs OMAH's -11.83%.

Which ETF is better, QDTE or OMAH?

On 1-year performance, QDTE leads with 40.36% vs 11.44% for OMAH. On fees, OMAH is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, OMAH has been the lower-risk option at 1.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QDTE or OMAH?

Over the 1-year period, QDTE has performed better with a 40.36% return vs 11.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDTE or OMAH?

OMAH is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for QDTE.

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

QDTE has the higher dividend yield at 42.16%, compared with 15.44% for OMAH.

What is the main difference between QDTE and OMAH?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and VistaShares. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for QDTE and 0.95% for OMAH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QDTE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 1.43), 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.