QYLD vs. COSW

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) and Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF (COSW).

QYLD and COSW are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. QYLD is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. It was launched on Dec 12, 2013. COSW is an actively managed fund by Roundhill. It was launched on Oct 23, 2025.

Performance

QYLD vs. COSW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) and Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF (COSW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

QYLD vs. COSW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	0.61%	4.27%
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF	17.85%	-10.71%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QYLD achieves a 0.61% return, which is significantly lower than COSW's 17.85% return.

QYLD

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: -1.11%
• YTD: 0.61%
• 6M: 7.46%
• 1Y: 16.36%
• 3Y*: 13.19%
• 5Y*: 7.01%
• 10Y*: 8.96%

COSW

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: -1.19%
• YTD: 17.85%
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QYLD vs. COSW - Expense Ratio Comparison

QYLD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than COSW's 0.99% expense ratio.

COSW

Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF

QYLD

Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF

Return for Risk

QYLD vs. COSW — Risk / Return Rank

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

QYLD

QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 68
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 79
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

QYLD vs. COSW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) and Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF (COSW). 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.

	QYLD	COSW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.00	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.61	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.57	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.32	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QYLD	COSW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.00	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.50	+0.06

Correlation

The correlation between QYLD and COSW is 0.01, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

QYLD vs. COSW - Dividend Comparison

QYLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.85%, less than COSW's 12.19% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	11.85%	11.55%	12.50%	11.78%	13.75%	12.85%	11.16%	9.84%	12.44%	7.69%	9.15%	9.42%
COSW Roundhill COST WeeklyPay ETF	12.19%	4.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

QYLD vs. COSW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QYLD drawdown since its inception was -24.75%, which is greater than COSW's maximum drawdown of -12.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QYLD and COSW.

Drawdown Indicators

	QYLD	COSW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.75%	-12.17%	-12.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.84%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.61%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.75%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.84%	-2.74%	+0.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.89%	-4.04%	+0.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.65%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QYLD	COSW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.90%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.50%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.43%	25.26%	-8.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.84%	25.26%	-10.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.51%	25.26%	-9.75%