RDTY vs. AAPW

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

RDTY (YieldMax™ R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) and AAPW (AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RDTY returned 23.71% vs 61.94% for AAPW. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RDTY charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for AAPW.

Performance

RDTY vs. AAPW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax™ R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (RDTY) and AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RDTY achieves a 18.88% return, which is significantly lower than AAPW's 21.74% return.

RDTY

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 1.91%
• 6M: 12.36%
• YTD: 18.88%
• 1Y: 23.71%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 22.35%

AAPW

• 1D: -2.91%
• 1M: 11.04%
• 6M: 31.34%
• YTD: 21.74%
• 1Y: 61.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.94%

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

RDTY vs. AAPW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RDTY YieldMax™ R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	18.88%	10.93%
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	21.74%	13.90%

Correlation

The correlation between RDTY and AAPW is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2025	0.38

RDTY vs. AAPW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RDTY	AAPW
Healthcare	20.2%	-
Financial Services	17.7%	-
Technology	14.8%	13.0%
Industrials	14.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	-
Real Estate	6.7%	-
Energy	5.4%	-
Basic Materials	4.4%	-
Utilities	2.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	-
Communication Services	2.2%	-

Return for Risk

RDTY vs. AAPW — Risk / Return Rank

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

RDTY

RDTY Risk / Return Rank: 59
RDTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
RDTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
RDTY Omega Ratio Rank: 50
RDTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
RDTY Martin Ratio Rank: 66

AAPW

AAPW Risk / Return Rank: 80
AAPW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
AAPW Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
AAPW Omega Ratio Rank: 82
AAPW Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
AAPW Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

RDTY vs. AAPW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax™ R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (RDTY) and AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW). 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.

	RDTY	AAPW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.38	2.09	-0.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.99	2.81	-0.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.36	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	3.59	-1.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.68	8.55	+0.14

RDTY vs. AAPW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RDTY Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is lower than the AAPW Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RDTY and AAPW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RDTY vs. AAPW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RDTY drawdown since its inception was -17.31%, smaller than the maximum AAPW drawdown of -36.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RDTY and AAPW.

Drawdown Indicators

	RDTY	AAPW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.31%	-36.28%	+18.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.20%	-17.36%	+8.16%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.85%	-2.91%	+2.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.56%	-10.64%	+8.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.74%	7.27%	-4.53%

Volatility

RDTY vs. AAPW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for YieldMax™ R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (RDTY) is 4.07%, while AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) has a volatility of 12.17%. This indicates that RDTY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AAPW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RDTY	AAPW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.07%	12.17%	-8.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.21%	23.14%	-9.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.28%	29.86%	-12.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.63%	35.02%	-13.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.63%	35.02%	-13.39%

RDTY vs. AAPW - Expense Ratio Comparison

RDTY has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than AAPW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

RDTY vs. AAPW - Dividend Comparison

RDTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 43.10%, more than AAPW's 29.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF	29.42%	28.83%
RDTY YieldMax™ R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	43.10%	36.75%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RDTY and AAPW in my portfolio?

RDTY and AAPW have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RDTY or AAPW?

AAPW has higher volatility (12.17%) compared to RDTY (4.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RDTY dropped -17.31% vs AAPW's -36.28%.

Which ETF is better, RDTY or AAPW?

On 1-year performance, AAPW leads with 61.94% vs 23.71% for RDTY. On fees, AAPW is cheaper at 0.99% per year. On volatility, RDTY has been the lower-risk option at 4.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RDTY or AAPW?

Over the 1-year period, AAPW has performed better with a 61.94% return vs 23.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RDTY or AAPW?

AAPW is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for RDTY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RDTY or AAPW?

RDTY has the higher dividend yield at 43.10%, compared with 29.42% for AAPW.

What is the main difference between RDTY and AAPW?

They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for RDTY and 0.99% for AAPW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AAPW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.38), 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.