QQCC.TO vs. ZNQ.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QQCC.TO (Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) and ZNQ.TO (BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity Index ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Over the past 5 years, QQCC.TO returned 15.67%/yr vs 20.92%/yr for ZNQ.TO. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QQCC.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ZNQ.TO.

Performance

QQCC.TO vs. ZNQ.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 BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity Index ETF (ZNQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQCC.TO achieves a 16.94% return, which is significantly lower than ZNQ.TO's 22.76% 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%

ZNQ.TO

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 13.05%
• YTD: 22.76%
• 6M: 18.72%
• 1Y: 42.93%
• 3Y*: 29.76%
• 5Y*: 20.92%
• 10Y*: —

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

QQCC.TO vs. ZNQ.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%	11.19%
ZNQ.TO BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity Index ETF	22.76%	14.60%	35.84%	51.32%	-28.06%	26.59%	44.65%	22.90%

Correlation

The correlation between QQCC.TO and ZNQ.TO is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2019	0.60

Over the past year, QQCC.TO and ZNQ.TO have become more correlated (0.93) than their long-term average of 0.60, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

Sectors	QQCC.TO	ZNQ.TO
Technology	50.5%	54.1%
Communication Services	16.1%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	12.6%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	8.6%	7.6%
Healthcare	5.1%	4.2%
Industrials	3.3%	3.1%
Utilities	1.5%	1.4%
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.2%
Energy	0.7%	0.6%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

QQCC.TO vs. ZNQ.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: 82
QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QQCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QQCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
QQCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
QQCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 80

ZNQ.TO

ZNQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 74
ZNQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
ZNQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
ZNQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 79
ZNQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
ZNQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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. ZNQ.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 BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity Index ETF (ZNQ.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	ZNQ.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.76	2.75	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.72	3.58	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.48	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.32	3.45	+0.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.04	10.86	+5.18
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. ZNQ.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is comparable to the ZNQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQCC.TO and ZNQ.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QQCC.TO	ZNQ.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.76	2.75	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90	1.01	-0.11
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	1.06	-1.06

Drawdowns

QQCC.TO vs. ZNQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.70%, which is greater than ZNQ.TO's maximum drawdown of -32.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQCC.TO and ZNQ.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQCC.TO	ZNQ.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.70%	-32.09%	-4.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.15%	-12.50%	+4.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.24%	-22.67%	+0.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.24%	-32.09%	+9.85%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.70%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.37%	-6.63%	-1.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.19%	3.96%	-1.77%

Volatility

QQCC.TO vs. ZNQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) is 3.75%, while BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity Index ETF (ZNQ.TO) has a volatility of 4.49%. This indicates that QQCC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZNQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QQCC.TO	ZNQ.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.75%	4.49%	-0.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.03%	11.99%	-1.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.78%	15.69%	-2.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.58%	20.81%	-3.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.29%	22.34%	-5.05%

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

QQCC.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than ZNQ.TO's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQCC.TO vs. ZNQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

QQCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.48%, more than ZNQ.TO's 0.20% 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%
ZNQ.TO BMO NASDAQ 100 Equity Index ETF	0.20%	0.25%	0.30%	0.35%	0.23%	0.12%	0.47%	0.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQCC.TO and ZNQ.TO in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, QQCC.TO and ZNQ.TO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, QQCC.TO or ZNQ.TO?

On fees, ZNQ.TO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQCC.TO or ZNQ.TO?

ZNQ.TO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for QQCC.TO.

What is the main difference between QQCC.TO and ZNQ.TO?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for QQCC.TO and 0.39% for ZNQ.TO.