QLDY vs. HOOW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QLDY (Defiance Nasdaq 100 LightningSpread Income ETF) and HOOW (Roundhill HOOD WeeklyPay ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QLDY is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Defiance, while HOOW is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill. Both are actively managed. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QLDY charges 1.04%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for HOOW.

Performance

QLDY vs. HOOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Defiance Nasdaq 100 LightningSpread Income ETF (QLDY) and Roundhill HOOD WeeklyPay ETF (HOOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QLDY achieves a 12.52% return, which is significantly higher than HOOW's -14.70% return.

QLDY

• 1D: -3.02%
• 1M: -1.79%
• YTD: 12.52%
• 6M: 10.50%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HOOW

• 1D: -2.94%
• 1M: 47.20%
• YTD: -14.70%
• 6M: -20.92%
• 1Y: 28.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QLDY vs. HOOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QLDY Defiance Nasdaq 100 LightningSpread Income ETF	12.52%	1.54%
HOOW Roundhill HOOD WeeklyPay ETF	-14.70%	-8.82%

Correlation

The correlation between QLDY and HOOW is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2025	0.63

Return for Risk

QLDY vs. HOOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

QLDY

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

HOOW

HOOW Risk / Return Rank: 16
HOOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
HOOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
HOOW Omega Ratio Rank: 19
HOOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
HOOW Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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.

QLDY vs. HOOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Nasdaq 100 LightningSpread Income ETF (QLDY) and Roundhill HOOD WeeklyPay ETF (HOOW). 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.

	QLDY	HOOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.34	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.10	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.13	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	0.44	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	0.76	—

Drawdowns

QLDY vs. HOOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLDY drawdown since its inception was -17.44%, smaller than the maximum HOOW drawdown of -65.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLDY and HOOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	QLDY	HOOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.44%	-65.74%	+48.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-65.74%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.63%	-42.07%	+36.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.23%	-29.96%	+25.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	38.05%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QLDY	HOOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	28.68%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	62.22%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.34%	84.38%	-63.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.34%	84.14%	-62.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.34%	84.14%	-62.80%

QLDY vs. HOOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLDY has a 1.04% expense ratio, which is higher than HOOW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

QLDY vs. HOOW - Dividend Comparison

QLDY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 24.21%, less than HOOW's 136.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
HOOW Roundhill HOOD WeeklyPay ETF	136.33%	67.92%
QLDY Defiance Nasdaq 100 LightningSpread Income ETF	24.21%	9.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QLDY and HOOW in my portfolio?

QLDY and HOOW have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QLDY or HOOW?

On fees, HOOW is cheaper at 0.99% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QLDY or HOOW?

HOOW is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.04% for QLDY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QLDY or HOOW?

HOOW has the higher dividend yield at 136.33%, compared with 24.21% for QLDY.

What is the main difference between QLDY and HOOW?

QLDY is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while HOOW is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Defiance and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 1.04% for QLDY and 0.99% for HOOW.