RLY vs. QCLR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RLY (SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF) and QCLR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RLY is a Hedge Fund fund actively managed by State Street, while QCLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Collar 95-110 Index. RLY is actively managed, while QCLR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RLY returned 13.30%/yr vs 13.86%/yr for QCLR. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RLY charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLR.

Performance

RLY vs. QCLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RLY achieves a 11.33% return, which is significantly higher than QCLR's 0.21% return.

RLY

• 1D: -0.77%
• 1M: -4.87%
• YTD: 11.33%
• 6M: 10.55%
• 1Y: 23.01%
• 3Y*: 13.30%
• 5Y*: 9.65%
• 10Y*: 8.09%

QCLR

• 1D: -1.44%
• 1M: -0.86%
• YTD: 0.21%
• 6M: -0.60%
• 1Y: 9.10%
• 3Y*: 13.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RLY vs. QCLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
RLY SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF	11.33%	20.26%	2.53%	2.56%	7.86%	5.20%
QCLR Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF	0.21%	11.27%	20.27%	28.87%	-18.87%	2.29%

Correlation

The correlation between RLY and QCLR is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021	0.33

Return for Risk

RLY vs. QCLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

RLY

RLY Risk / Return Rank: 74
RLY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
RLY Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
RLY Omega Ratio Rank: 72
RLY Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
RLY Martin Ratio Rank: 83

QCLR

QCLR Risk / Return Rank: 25
QCLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
QCLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
QCLR Omega Ratio Rank: 27
QCLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
QCLR Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

RLY vs. QCLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR). 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.

	RLY	QCLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.20	0.95	+1.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.03	1.30	+1.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.18	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.57	0.89	+2.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.17	3.21	+12.96

RLY vs. QCLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RLY Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is higher than the QCLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RLY and QCLR, 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

RLY vs. QCLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RLY drawdown since its inception was -37.75%, which is greater than QCLR's maximum drawdown of -21.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RLY and QCLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	RLY	QCLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.75%	-21.77%	-15.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.47%	-10.22%	+3.75%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.08%	-13.58%	+3.50%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.94%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.17%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.47%	-2.05%	-4.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.44%	-6.14%	-3.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.43%	2.84%	-1.41%

Volatility

RLY vs. QCLR - Volatility Comparison

SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) has a higher volatility of 3.18% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) at 1.58%. This indicates that RLY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QCLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RLY	QCLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.18%	1.58%	+1.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.47%	6.59%	+1.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.49%	9.68%	+0.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.53%	12.38%	+1.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.81%	12.38%	+1.43%

RLY vs. QCLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

RLY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than QCLR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

RLY vs. QCLR - Dividend Comparison

RLY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.01%, less than QCLR's 14.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QCLR Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF	14.86%	14.89%	8.89%	0.47%	0.27%	1.64%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RLY SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF	3.01%	3.24%	3.31%	3.71%	5.66%	12.15%	2.16%	3.45%	2.76%	1.85%	2.07%	1.80%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RLY and QCLR in my portfolio?

RLY and QCLR have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RLY or QCLR?

RLY has higher volatility (3.18%) compared to QCLR (1.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RLY dropped -37.75% vs QCLR's -21.77%.

Which ETF is better, RLY or QCLR?

On 3-year performance, QCLR leads with 13.86% vs 13.30% for RLY. On fees, RLY is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QCLR has been the lower-risk option at 1.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RLY or QCLR?

Over the 3-year period, QCLR has performed better with a 13.86% return vs 13.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RLY or QCLR?

RLY is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RLY or QCLR?

QCLR has the higher dividend yield at 14.86%, compared with 3.01% for RLY.

What is the main difference between RLY and QCLR?

RLY is categorized as Hedge Fund, while QCLR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for RLY and 0.60% for QCLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RLY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 0.95), 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.