QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO
QQCC.TO (Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) and XEQT.TO (iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio) are both exchange-traded funds - QQCC.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund managed by Global X, while XEQT.TO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by iShares. Over the past 5 years, QQCC.TO returned 15.67%/yr vs 13.72%/yr for XEQT.TO. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QQCC.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XEQT.TO.
Performance
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QQCC.TO achieves a 16.94% return, which is significantly higher than XEQT.TO's 12.29% 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%
XEQT.TO
- 1D
- -0.56%
- 1M
- 5.98%
- YTD
- 12.29%
- 6M
- 11.20%
- 1Y
- 29.24%
- 3Y*
- 21.78%
- 5Y*
- 13.72%
- 10Y*
- —
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QQCC.TO Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF | 16.94% | 11.64% | 33.48% | 35.99% | -8.51% | 7.92% | -3.26% | 11.08% |
XEQT.TO iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio | 12.29% | 19.47% | 24.36% | 17.25% | -11.01% | 18.94% | 11.82% | 9.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between QQCC.TO and XEQT.TO is 0.79, 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 | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2019 | 0.63 |
The correlation between QQCC.TO and XEQT.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (all time) to 0.79 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Industrials
Utilities
Basic Materials
Energy
Financial Services
Real Estate
Technology
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Communication Services
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Consumer Cyclical
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Consumer Defensive
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Healthcare
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Industrials
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Utilities
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Basic Materials
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Energy
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Financial Services
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Real Estate
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO — Risk / Return Rank
QQCC.TO
XEQT.TO
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.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 iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio (XEQT.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.TO | XEQT.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | 1.47 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.32 | 3.56 | +0.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.04 | 15.50 | +0.54 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QQCC.TO | XEQT.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.76 | 2.53 | +0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 | 1.05 | -0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.63 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.00 | 0.95 | -0.95 |
Drawdowns
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QQCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.70%, which is greater than XEQT.TO's maximum drawdown of -29.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQCC.TO and XEQT.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QQCC.TO | XEQT.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.70% | -29.74% | -6.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.15% | -8.25% | +0.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.24% | -15.08% | -7.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.24% | -19.56% | -2.68% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.70% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.56% | +0.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.37% | -4.11% | -4.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.19% | 1.89% | +0.30% |
Volatility
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Volatility Comparison
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) and iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio (XEQT.TO) have volatilities of 3.75% and 3.70%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QQCC.TO | XEQT.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.75% | 3.70% | +0.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.03% | 9.38% | +0.65% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.78% | 11.63% | +1.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.58% | 13.12% | +4.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.29% | 15.56% | +1.73% |
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
QQCC.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XEQT.TO's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
QQCC.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Dividend Comparison
QQCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.48%, more than XEQT.TO's 1.48% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XEQT.TO iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio | 1.48% | 1.66% | 2.01% | 2.07% | 2.12% | 1.64% | 1.66% | 1.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QQCC.TO and XEQT.TO have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XEQT.TO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XEQT.TO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for QQCC.TO.
QQCC.TO is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while XEQT.TO is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for QQCC.TO and 0.20% for XEQT.TO.
Find the right allocation for QQCC.TO and XEQT.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