PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

QQCC.TO vs. TXF.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QQCC.TO (Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) and TXF.TO (CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common) are both exchange-traded funds - QQCC.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund managed by Global X, while TXF.TO is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by CI Investments. Over the past 10 years, QQCC.TO returned 10.87%/yr vs 19.77%/yr for TXF.TO. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QQCC.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for TXF.TO.

Performance

QQCC.TO vs. TXF.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 CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common (TXF.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 lower than TXF.TO's 31.75% return. Over the past 10 years, QQCC.TO has underperformed TXF.TO with an annualized return of 10.87%, while TXF.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.77% 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%

TXF.TO

1D
0.07%
1M
18.07%
YTD
31.75%
6M
31.92%
1Y
64.62%
3Y*
33.10%
5Y*
18.49%
10Y*
19.77%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QQCC.TO vs. TXF.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%
TXF.TO
CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common		31.75%24.81%18.69%60.80%-35.54%26.82%32.50%26.56%-6.78%33.65%

Correlation

The correlation between QQCC.TO and TXF.TO is 0.75, 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

0.75

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

0.81

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

0.67

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2011

0.52

Over the past year, QQCC.TO and TXF.TO have become more correlated (0.75) than their long-term average of 0.52, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

Sectors
QQCC.TO
TXF.TO

Technology

50.5%
89.0%

Communication Services

16.1%
11.1%

Consumer Cyclical

12.6%

-

Consumer Defensive

8.6%

-

Healthcare

5.1%

-

Industrials

3.3%

-

Utilities

1.5%

-

Basic Materials

1.3%

-

Energy

0.7%

-

Financial Services

0.2%
0.0%

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Technology

QQCC.TO
50.5%
TXF.TO
89.0%

Communication Services

QQCC.TO
16.1%
TXF.TO
11.1%

Consumer Cyclical

QQCC.TO
12.6%
TXF.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

QQCC.TO
8.6%
TXF.TO

-

Healthcare

QQCC.TO
5.1%
TXF.TO

-

Industrials

QQCC.TO
3.3%
TXF.TO

-

Utilities

QQCC.TO
1.5%
TXF.TO

-

Basic Materials

QQCC.TO
1.3%
TXF.TO

-

Energy

QQCC.TO
0.7%
TXF.TO

-

Financial Services

QQCC.TO
0.2%
TXF.TO
0.0%

Real Estate

QQCC.TO
0.1%
TXF.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

CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common

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 TXF.TO:
TXF.TO vs. QQQY.TOTXF.TO vs. HDIV.TOTXF.TO vs. QQCL.TOTXF.TO vs. XEQT.TOTXF.TO vs. HXQ.TOTXF.TO vs. VFV.TOTXF.TO vs. HTAE.TO

Return for Risk

QQCC.TO vs. TXF.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
TXF.TO
TXF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
TXF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TXF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
TXF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
TXF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
TXF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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. TXF.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 CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common (TXF.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.TOTXF.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.76
3.24

-0.48

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.72
3.90

-0.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.53

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.32

4.21

+0.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.04

15.54

+0.51

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. TXF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is comparable to the TXF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQCC.TO and TXF.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.TOTXF.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.76

3.24

-0.48

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

0.76

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

0.84

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.00

0.81

-0.81

Drawdowns

QQCC.TO vs. TXF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.70%, smaller than the maximum TXF.TO drawdown of -41.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQCC.TO and TXF.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QQCC.TOTXF.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.70%

-41.23%

+4.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.15%

-15.43%

+7.28%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.24%

-27.38%

+5.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.24%

-41.23%

+18.99%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.70%

-41.23%

+4.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.37%

-6.17%

-2.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.19%

4.17%

-1.98%

Volatility

QQCC.TO vs. TXF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) is 3.75%, while CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common (TXF.TO) has a volatility of 5.71%. This indicates that QQCC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TXF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QQCC.TOTXF.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.75%

5.71%

-1.96%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.03%

16.39%

-6.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.78%

20.09%

-7.31%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.58%

24.63%

-7.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.29%

23.54%

-6.25%

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

QQCC.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than TXF.TO's 0.71% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQCC.TO vs. TXF.TO - Dividend Comparison

QQCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.48%, more than TXF.TO's 9.11% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
TXF.TO
CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common		9.11%10.59%9.76%7.48%14.13%7.77%11.01%7.29%9.29%4.89%6.16%6.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

QQCC.TO and TXF.TO have a correlation of 0.75, 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 0.71% for TXF.TO.

QQCC.TO is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while TXF.TO is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and CI Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for QQCC.TO and 0.71% for TXF.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QQCC.TO and TXF.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