PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QQCC.TO (Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) and QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Over the past year, QQCC.TO returned 32.95% vs 28.69% for QQQI. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QQCC.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for QQQI.

Performance

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI - 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 NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

QQCC.TO is traded in CAD, while QQQI is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the QQQI values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQCC.TO achieves a 16.46% return, which is significantly higher than QQQI's 13.58% return.

QQCC.TO

1D
-2.36%
1M
2.98%
YTD
16.46%
6M
15.75%
1Y
32.95%
3Y*
23.66%
5Y*
0.01%
10Y*
1.31%

QQQI

1D
-2.98%
1M
1.82%
YTD
13.58%
6M
11.99%
1Y
28.69%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024
QQCC.TO
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF		16.46%11.64%26.59%
QQQI
NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF		13.58%13.21%27.80%

Correlation

The correlation between QQCC.TO and QQQI is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2024

0.77

The correlation between QQCC.TO and QQQI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
QQCC.TO
QQQI

Technology

53.8%
58.1%

Communication Services

15.8%
14.2%

Consumer Cyclical

12.3%
11.3%

Consumer Defensive

7.7%
6.5%

Healthcare

4.2%
3.9%

Industrials

2.8%
3.0%

Utilities

1.4%
1.3%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.0%

Energy

0.6%
0.5%

Financial Services

0.2%
0.2%

Real Estate

0.1%
0.1%

Technology

QQCC.TO
53.8%
QQQI
58.1%

Communication Services

QQCC.TO
15.8%
QQQI
14.2%

Consumer Cyclical

QQCC.TO
12.3%
QQQI
11.3%

Consumer Defensive

QQCC.TO
7.7%
QQQI
6.5%

Healthcare

QQCC.TO
4.2%
QQQI
3.9%

Industrials

QQCC.TO
2.8%
QQQI
3.0%

Utilities

QQCC.TO
1.4%
QQQI
1.3%

Basic Materials

QQCC.TO
1.1%
QQQI
1.0%

Energy

QQCC.TO
0.6%
QQQI
0.5%

Financial Services

QQCC.TO
0.2%
QQQI
0.2%

Real Estate

QQCC.TO
0.1%
QQQI
0.1%

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

NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF

Often compared with QQCC.TO:
QQCC.TO vs. QQCL.TOQQCC.TO vs. QQC.TOQQCC.TO vs. QQQQQCC.TO vs. NVDA.TOQQCC.TO vs. XQQ.TOQQCC.TO vs. JEPQ.TOQQCC.TO vs. HXQ.TO
Often compared with QQQI:
QQQI vs. JEPQQQQI vs. QQQQQQI vs. SPYIQQQI vs. GPIQQQQI vs. JEPIQQQI vs. SCHDQQQI vs. QQQY

Return for Risk

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI — 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: 7777
Overall Rank
QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
QQQI
QQQI Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
QQQI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQQI Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQQI Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
QQQI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQQI Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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. QQQI - 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 NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). 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.

QQCC.TOQQQIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.30
1.91

+0.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.09
2.57

+0.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.35

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.06

3.16

+0.91

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.62

11.37

+3.25

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the QQQI Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQCC.TO and QQQI, 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...

Drawdowns

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -67.77%, which is greater than QQQI's maximum drawdown of -19.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQCC.TO and QQQI.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QQCC.TOQQQIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.77%

-19.93%

-47.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.15%

-9.13%

+0.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.24%

—

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-59.13%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-62.91%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.94%

-2.98%

-19.96%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.26%

-2.56%

-25.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.26%

2.53%

-0.27%

Volatility

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) is 7.30%, while NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI) has a volatility of 7.92%. This indicates that QQCC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QQCC.TOQQQIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.30%

7.92%

-0.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.91%

12.36%

-0.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.39%

15.14%

-0.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.39%

18.12%

+10.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.33%

18.12%

+5.21%

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQCC.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQI's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQCC.TO vs. QQQI - Dividend Comparison

QQCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.52%, less than QQQI's 14.97% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QQCC.TO
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF		10.52%11.27%9.84%11.79%11.06%2.58%2.92%3.14%3.96%3.00%3.36%4.44%
QQQI
NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF		14.97%13.82%12.85%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

QQCC.TO and QQQI have a correlation of 0.77, 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 0.68% for QQQI.

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for QQCC.TO and 0.68% for QQQI.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QQCC.TO and QQQI

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