PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QYLG vs. MSTZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QYLG vs. MSTZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QYLG achieves a 12.90% return, which is significantly higher than MSTZ's -23.27% return.


QYLG

1D
-1.71%
1M
0.11%
6M
10.91%
YTD
12.90%
1Y
25.69%
3Y*
18.73%
5Y*
11.73%
10Y*

MSTZ

1D
5.07%
1M
46.38%
6M
-9.68%
YTD
-23.27%
1Y
282.56%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QYLG vs. MSTZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
QYLG
Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF
12.90%15.29%7.35%
MSTZ
T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF
-23.27%-38.95%-94.43%

Correlation

The correlation between QYLG and MSTZ is -0.48, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2024

-0.48

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

QYLG vs. MSTZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QYLG
QYLG Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
QYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

MSTZ
MSTZ Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
MSTZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MSTZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
MSTZ Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
MSTZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
MSTZ Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
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.

QYLG vs. MSTZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


QYLGMSTZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.32

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.07

3.35

-0.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.95

6.53

+6.42

QYLG vs. MSTZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QYLG Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is comparable to the MSTZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QYLG and MSTZ, 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...

Drawdowns

QYLG vs. MSTZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QYLG drawdown since its inception was -29.98%, smaller than the maximum MSTZ drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QYLG and MSTZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QYLGMSTZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.98%

-99.38%

+69.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.42%

-84.89%

+76.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.49%

-97.39%

+94.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.34%

-94.53%

+88.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.99%

43.51%

-41.52%

Volatility

QYLG vs. MSTZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG) is 6.76%, while T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ) has a volatility of 56.56%. This indicates that QYLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QYLGMSTZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.76%

56.56%

-49.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.19%

135.11%

-122.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.28%

148.53%

-134.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.29%

171.02%

-152.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.06%

171.02%

-152.96%

QYLG vs. MSTZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QYLG has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTZ's 1.05% expense ratio.


Dividends

QYLG vs. MSTZ - Dividend Comparison

QYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.61%, while MSTZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
MSTZ
T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QYLG
Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF
16.61%17.93%25.27%5.43%6.91%10.15%1.44%

Frequently Asked Questions


QYLG and MSTZ have a correlation of -0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MSTZ has higher volatility (56.56%) compared to QYLG (6.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QYLG dropped -29.98% vs MSTZ's -99.38%.

On 1-year performance, MSTZ leads with 282.56% vs 25.69% for QYLG. On fees, QYLG is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QYLG has been the lower-risk option at 6.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MSTZ has performed better with a 282.56% return vs 25.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QYLG is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for MSTZ.

QYLG has the higher dividend yield at 16.61%, compared with 0.00% for MSTZ.

QYLG is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while MSTZ is Inverse Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QYLG and 1.05% for MSTZ.

MSTZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.81), 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 QYLG and MSTZ

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