PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QYLD vs. EMXC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QYLD vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QYLD achieves a 7.05% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC's 32.33% return.


QYLD

1D
1.07%
1M
0.23%
YTD
7.05%
6M
8.87%
1Y
22.45%
3Y*
13.42%
5Y*
8.24%
10Y*
9.77%

EMXC

1D
2.43%
1M
-1.88%
YTD
32.33%
6M
36.39%
1Y
62.72%
3Y*
25.41%
5Y*
11.46%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QYLD vs. EMXC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
7.05%9.28%19.35%22.77%-19.08%10.41%8.72%22.69%-3.07%6.50%
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF
32.33%35.14%2.68%18.96%-19.56%8.54%12.76%15.80%-12.96%7.01%

Correlation

The correlation between QYLD and EMXC is 0.71, 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

0.71

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

0.64

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

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2017

0.58

The correlation between QYLD and EMXC shifts across timeframes, from 0.58 (all time) to 0.71 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QYLD vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QYLD
EMXC

Technology

53.8%
45.0%

Communication Services

15.8%
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

12.3%
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

7.7%
2.9%

Healthcare

4.2%
2.2%

Industrials

2.8%
8.3%

Utilities

1.4%
2.3%

Basic Materials

1.1%
6.8%

Energy

0.6%
4.2%

Financial Services

0.2%
19.6%

Real Estate

0.1%
1.0%

Technology

QYLD
53.8%
EMXC
45.0%

Communication Services

QYLD
15.8%
EMXC
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

QYLD
12.3%
EMXC
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

QYLD
7.7%
EMXC
2.9%

Healthcare

QYLD
4.2%
EMXC
2.2%

Industrials

QYLD
2.8%
EMXC
8.3%

Utilities

QYLD
1.4%
EMXC
2.3%

Basic Materials

QYLD
1.1%
EMXC
6.8%

Energy

QYLD
0.6%
EMXC
4.2%

Financial Services

QYLD
0.2%
EMXC
19.6%

Real Estate

QYLD
0.1%
EMXC
1.0%

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

QYLD vs. EMXC — Risk / Return Rank

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

QYLD
QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

EMXC
EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

QYLD vs. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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.


QYLDEMXCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.50

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.54

4.37

+0.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

26.31

17.27

+9.04

QYLD vs. EMXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QYLD Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is comparable to the EMXC Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QYLD and EMXC, 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


QYLDEMXCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.56

2.71

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.56

0.65

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.59

0.50

+0.09

Drawdowns

QYLD vs. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QYLD drawdown since its inception was -24.75%, smaller than the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QYLD and EMXC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QYLDEMXCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.75%

-42.81%

+18.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.97%

-14.41%

+9.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.06%

-19.12%

+0.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.61%

-28.91%

+4.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.83%

-7.55%

+6.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.83%

-10.19%

+6.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.86%

3.64%

-2.78%

Volatility

QYLD vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) is 2.86%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 12.57%. This indicates that QYLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QYLDEMXCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.86%

12.57%

-9.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.44%

21.20%

-13.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.84%

23.27%

-14.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.73%

17.82%

-3.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.51%

19.99%

-4.48%

QYLD vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

QYLD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

QYLD vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison

QYLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.55%, more than EMXC's 2.13% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF
2.13%2.82%2.69%1.83%2.85%1.78%1.45%3.25%2.63%0.99%0.00%0.00%
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
11.55%11.55%12.50%11.78%13.75%12.85%11.16%9.84%12.44%7.69%9.15%9.42%

Frequently Asked Questions


QYLD and EMXC have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMXC has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to QYLD (2.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QYLD dropped -24.75% vs EMXC's -42.81%.

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 11.46% vs 8.24% for QYLD. On fees, EMXC is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, QYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 11.46% return vs 8.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMXC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.55%, compared with 2.13% for EMXC.

QYLD is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while EMXC is Emerging Markets Equities. QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2, while EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QYLD and 0.49% for EMXC.

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.56), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QYLD and EMXC

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