QDVO vs. QQQH

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

QDVO (Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF) and QQQH (NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QDVO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Amplify, while QQQH is a Nasdaq-100 fund managed by Neos. Over the past year, QDVO returned 19.25% vs 14.15% for QQQH. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QDVO charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for QQQH.

Performance

QDVO vs. QQQH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF (QQQH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDVO achieves a 5.23% return, which is significantly higher than QQQH's 4.35% return.

QDVO

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: -3.88%
• YTD: 5.23%
• 6M: 3.94%
• 1Y: 19.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQQH

• 1D: -1.18%
• 1M: -1.69%
• YTD: 4.35%
• 6M: 3.42%
• 1Y: 14.15%
• 3Y*: 17.76%
• 5Y*: 7.95%
• 10Y*: —

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

QDVO vs. QQQH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QDVO Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF	5.23%	20.16%	9.76%
QQQH NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF	4.35%	14.17%	7.48%

Correlation

The correlation between QDVO and QQQH is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2024	0.86

The correlation between QDVO and QQQH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

QDVO vs. QQQH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QDVO	QQQH
Technology	50.4%	58.0%
Communication Services	15.4%	14.5%
Consumer Cyclical	12.9%	11.5%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	6.5%
Healthcare	4.9%	3.7%
Financial Services	3.8%	0.2%
Industrials	2.9%	2.8%
Basic Materials	2.2%	1.1%
Energy	0.9%	0.5%
Utilities	0.4%	1.2%
Real Estate	-	0.1%

Return for Risk

QDVO vs. QQQH — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDVO

QDVO Risk / Return Rank: 46
QDVO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
QDVO Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
QDVO Omega Ratio Rank: 47
QDVO Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
QDVO Martin Ratio Rank: 47

QQQH

QQQH Risk / Return Rank: 44
QQQH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
QQQH Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
QQQH Omega Ratio Rank: 42
QQQH Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
QQQH 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.

QDVO vs. QQQH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF (QQQH). 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.

	QDVO	QQQH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	1.32	+0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	1.81	+0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.25	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.89	2.04	-0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.31	8.47	-1.16

QDVO vs. QQQH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDVO Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is comparable to the QQQH Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDVO and QQQH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

QDVO vs. QQQH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDVO drawdown since its inception was -17.75%, smaller than the maximum QQQH drawdown of -31.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDVO and QQQH.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDVO	QQQH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.75%	-31.24%	+13.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.21%	-6.96%	-3.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.18%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-31.24%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.07%	-3.32%	-1.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.42%	-8.21%	+5.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.64%	1.67%	+0.97%

Volatility

QDVO vs. QQQH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO) is 4.47%, while NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF (QQQH) has a volatility of 5.33%. This indicates that QDVO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDVO	QQQH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.47%	5.33%	-0.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.52%	8.63%	+0.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.67%	10.78%	+1.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.52%	13.36%	+4.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.52%	13.46%	+4.06%

QDVO vs. QQQH - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDVO has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQH's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDVO vs. QQQH - Dividend Comparison

QDVO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.56%, more than QQQH's 9.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
QDVO Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF	10.56%	9.92%	2.79%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQH NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF	9.04%	8.86%	7.53%	7.18%	9.05%	7.77%	7.48%	0.65%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDVO and QQQH in my portfolio?

QDVO and QQQH have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QDVO or QQQH?

QQQH has higher volatility (5.33%) compared to QDVO (4.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDVO dropped -17.75% vs QQQH's -31.24%.

Which ETF is better, QDVO or QQQH?

On 1-year performance, QDVO leads with 19.25% vs 14.15% for QQQH. On fees, QDVO is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, QDVO has been the lower-risk option at 4.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QDVO or QQQH?

Over the 1-year period, QDVO has performed better with a 19.25% return vs 14.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDVO or QQQH?

QDVO is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for QQQH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QDVO or QQQH?

QDVO has the higher dividend yield at 10.56%, compared with 9.04% for QQQH.

What is the main difference between QDVO and QQQH?

QDVO is categorized as Derivative Income, while QQQH is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Amplify and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for QDVO and 0.68% for QQQH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QDVO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs 1.32), 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.