PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QQCC.TO (Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) and GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQCC.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund managed by Global X, while GLCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X. Over the past 10 years, QQCC.TO returned 10.87%/yr vs 14.52%/yr for GLCC.TO. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QQCC.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for GLCC.TO.

Performance

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQCC.TO achieves a 16.94% return, which is significantly higher than GLCC.TO's -0.45% return. Over the past 10 years, QQCC.TO has underperformed GLCC.TO with an annualized return of 10.87%, while GLCC.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 14.52% annualized return.

QQCC.TO

1D
0.69%
1M
10.18%
YTD
16.94%
6M
14.76%
1Y
35.05%
3Y*
23.56%
5Y*
15.67%
10Y*
10.87%

GLCC.TO

1D
-2.75%
1M
1.61%
YTD
-0.45%
6M
4.96%
1Y
60.20%
3Y*
40.99%
5Y*
21.30%
10Y*
14.52%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QQCC.TO
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF		16.94%11.64%33.48%35.99%-8.51%7.92%-3.26%16.18%-15.89%18.77%
GLCC.TO
Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF		-0.45%137.43%20.18%6.19%-1.80%-9.37%15.00%38.72%-0.38%7.33%

Correlation

The correlation between QQCC.TO and GLCC.TO is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.21

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.09

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2011

0.13

The correlation between QQCC.TO and GLCC.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (3 years) to 0.21 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
QQCC.TO
GLCC.TO

Technology

50.5%

-

Communication Services

16.1%

-

Consumer Cyclical

12.6%

-

Consumer Defensive

8.6%

-

Healthcare

5.1%

-

Industrials

3.3%

-

Utilities

1.5%

-

Basic Materials

1.3%
100.0%

Energy

0.7%

-

Financial Services

0.2%

-

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Technology

QQCC.TO
50.5%
GLCC.TO

-

Communication Services

QQCC.TO
16.1%
GLCC.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

QQCC.TO
12.6%
GLCC.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

QQCC.TO
8.6%
GLCC.TO

-

Healthcare

QQCC.TO
5.1%
GLCC.TO

-

Industrials

QQCC.TO
3.3%
GLCC.TO

-

Utilities

QQCC.TO
1.5%
GLCC.TO

-

Basic Materials

QQCC.TO
1.3%
GLCC.TO
100.0%

Energy

QQCC.TO
0.7%
GLCC.TO

-

Financial Services

QQCC.TO
0.2%
GLCC.TO

-

Real Estate

QQCC.TO
0.1%
GLCC.TO

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF

Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF

Often compared with QQCC.TO:
QQCC.TO vs. QQCL.TOQQCC.TO vs. QQC.TOQQCC.TO vs. QQQIQQCC.TO vs. QQQQQCC.TO vs. NVDA.TOQQCC.TO vs. XQQ.TOQQCC.TO vs. JEPQ.TO
Often compared with GLCC.TO:
GLCC.TO vs. AMAX.TOGLCC.TO vs. DXMO.TOGLCC.TO vs. IGLDGLCC.TO vs. GLDI.LGLCC.TO vs. BCCCGLCC.TO vs. WAF.AXGLCC.TO vs. 4GLD.DE

Return for Risk

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
QQCC.TO
QQCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO
GLCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) and Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO). 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.

QQCC.TOGLCC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.76
1.45

+1.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.72
1.86

+1.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.27

+0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.32

2.10

+2.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.04

5.69

+10.35

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is higher than the GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQCC.TO and GLCC.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

QQCC.TOGLCC.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.76

1.45

+1.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

0.67

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

0.46

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.00

0.00

0.00

Drawdowns

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.70%, smaller than the maximum GLCC.TO drawdown of -71.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQCC.TO and GLCC.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QQCC.TOGLCC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.70%

-71.12%

+34.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.15%

-28.86%

+20.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.24%

-28.86%

+6.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.24%

-37.60%

+15.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.70%

-44.83%

+8.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-23.43%

+23.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.37%

-34.43%

+26.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.19%

10.61%

-8.42%

Volatility

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) is 3.75%, while Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a volatility of 14.96%. This indicates that QQCC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QQCC.TOGLCC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.75%

14.96%

-11.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.03%

34.13%

-24.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.78%

41.70%

-28.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.58%

31.94%

-14.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.29%

31.95%

-14.66%

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQCC.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than GLCC.TO's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQCC.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

QQCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.48%, more than GLCC.TO's 8.69% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GLCC.TO
Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF		8.69%6.01%10.30%11.16%10.08%6.31%6.47%4.58%5.62%7.09%9.21%11.63%
QQCC.TO
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF		10.48%11.27%9.89%11.85%11.04%5.15%5.84%6.31%7.90%6.01%6.73%8.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

QQCC.TO and GLCC.TO have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QQCC.TO is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QQCC.TO is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for GLCC.TO.

QQCC.TO is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while GLCC.TO is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for QQCC.TO and 0.79% for GLCC.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QQCC.TO and GLCC.TO

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