QYLP.L vs. SMYY

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QYLP.L (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP) and SMYY (GraniteShares YieldBOOST SMCI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QYLP.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Cboe Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite Index, while SMYY is a Options Trading fund managed by GraniteShares. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QYLP.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 1.07%/yr for SMYY.

Performance

QYLP.L vs. SMYY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP (QYLP.L) and GraniteShares YieldBOOST SMCI ETF (SMYY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

QYLP.L is traded in GBP, while SMYY is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the SMYY values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QYLP.L achieves a 4.67% return, which is significantly lower than SMYY's 7.39% return.

QYLP.L

• 1D: -0.91%
• 1M: 2.04%
• YTD: 4.67%
• 6M: 5.64%
• 1Y: 17.92%
• 3Y*: 6.77%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SMYY

• 1D: 0.24%
• 1M: 4.57%
• YTD: 7.39%
• 6M: -10.78%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QYLP.L vs. SMYY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QYLP.L Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP	4.67%	6.85%
SMYY GraniteShares YieldBOOST SMCI ETF	7.39%	-27.65%

Correlation

The correlation between QYLP.L and SMYY is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025	0.19

Return for Risk

QYLP.L vs. SMYY — Risk / Return Rank

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

QYLP.L

QYLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
QYLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
QYLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
QYLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
QYLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
QYLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

QYLP.L vs. SMYY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP (QYLP.L) and GraniteShares YieldBOOST SMCI ETF (SMYY). 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.

	QYLP.L	SMYY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.03	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.76	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.09	—	—
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

	QYLP.L	SMYY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.09	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.24	-0.98	+1.22

Drawdowns

QYLP.L vs. SMYY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QYLP.L drawdown since its inception was -22.40%, smaller than the maximum SMYY drawdown of -36.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QYLP.L and SMYY.

Drawdown Indicators

	QYLP.L	SMYY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.40%	-36.41%	+14.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.75%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.40%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.65%	-28.84%	+24.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.64%	-25.33%	+16.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.27%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QYLP.L	SMYY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.76%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.58%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.55%	31.99%	-23.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.11%	31.99%	-16.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.11%	31.99%	-16.88%

QYLP.L vs. SMYY - Expense Ratio Comparison

QYLP.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than SMYY's 1.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

QYLP.L vs. SMYY - Dividend Comparison

QYLP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.74%, less than SMYY's 146.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
QYLP.L Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call UCITS ETF Dis GBP	7.74%	8.93%	8.31%	9.56%
SMYY GraniteShares YieldBOOST SMCI ETF	146.54%	53.33%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QYLP.L and SMYY in my portfolio?

QYLP.L and SMYY have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QYLP.L or SMYY?

On fees, QYLP.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QYLP.L or SMYY?

QYLP.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.07% for SMYY.

What is the main difference between QYLP.L and SMYY?

QYLP.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while SMYY is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Global X and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for QYLP.L and 1.07% for SMYY.