QTR vs. RYLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QTR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF) and RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QTR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index, while RYLD is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QTR returned 22.93%/yr vs 7.45%/yr for RYLD. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

QTR vs. RYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QTR achieves a 17.64% return, which is significantly higher than RYLD's 8.33% return.

QTR

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 10.52%
• YTD: 17.64%
• 6M: 15.72%
• 1Y: 33.76%
• 3Y*: 22.93%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RYLD

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 2.78%
• YTD: 8.33%
• 6M: 9.14%
• 1Y: 21.47%
• 3Y*: 7.45%
• 5Y*: 2.69%
• 10Y*: —

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

QTR vs. RYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	17.64%	14.52%	21.46%	45.53%	-29.94%	4.16%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	8.33%	5.65%	10.13%	0.27%	-13.03%	1.74%

Correlation

The correlation between QTR and RYLD is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 27, 2021	0.61

The correlation between QTR and RYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

QTR vs. RYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QTR	RYLD
Technology	53.8%	16.8%
Communication Services	15.8%	2.5%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	2.4%
Healthcare	4.2%	16.5%
Industrials	2.8%	17.5%
Utilities	1.4%	2.9%
Basic Materials	1.1%	4.8%
Energy	0.6%	6.2%
Financial Services	0.2%	104.9%
Real Estate	0.1%	6.2%

Return for Risk

QTR vs. RYLD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

QTR

QTR Risk / Return Rank: 64
QTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
QTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
QTR Omega Ratio Rank: 68
QTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
QTR Martin Ratio Rank: 55

RYLD

RYLD Risk / Return Rank: 66
RYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
RYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
RYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
RYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

QTR vs. RYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). 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.

	QTR	RYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	2.03	+0.37
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	2.86	+0.37
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.42	-0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.76	3.43	-0.67
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.47	13.86	-4.39
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QTR vs. RYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTR Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the RYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTR and RYLD, 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

	QTR	RYLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40	2.03	+0.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.19	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.68	0.32	+0.37

Drawdowns

QTR vs. RYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTR drawdown since its inception was -31.72%, smaller than the maximum RYLD drawdown of -41.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTR and RYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTR	RYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.72%	-41.53%	+9.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.29%	-6.29%	-6.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.99%	-19.05%	+0.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.24%	-0.19%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.84%	-8.84%	0.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.57%	1.55%	+2.02%

Volatility

QTR vs. RYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) has a higher volatility of 4.52% compared to Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) at 2.02%. This indicates that QTR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QTR	RYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.52%	2.02%	+2.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.68%	7.60%	+3.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.14%	10.67%	+3.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.10%	14.03%	+4.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.10%	17.20%	+0.90%

QTR vs. RYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QTR and RYLD have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

QTR vs. RYLD - Dividend Comparison

QTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.96%, more than RYLD's 11.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	15.96%	18.77%	0.50%	0.53%	0.36%	1.90%	0.00%	0.00%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	11.65%	12.00%	12.03%	12.64%	13.49%	12.35%	10.76%	6.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTR and RYLD in my portfolio?

QTR and RYLD have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QTR or RYLD?

QTR has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to RYLD (2.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTR dropped -31.72% vs RYLD's -41.53%.

Which ETF is better, QTR or RYLD?

On 3-year performance, QTR leads with 22.93% vs 7.45% for RYLD. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, RYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QTR or RYLD?

Over the 3-year period, QTR has performed better with a 22.93% return vs 7.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTR or RYLD?

QTR and RYLD have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QTR or RYLD?

QTR has the higher dividend yield at 15.96%, compared with 11.65% for RYLD.

What is the main difference between QTR and RYLD?

QTR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while RYLD is Hedge Fund. QTR tracks NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index, while RYLD tracks CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.03), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.