RYLD vs. FVC
RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) and FVC (First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF) are both Hedge Fund funds - RYLD tracks the CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index while FVC tracks the Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus Five Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RYLD returned 2.69%/yr vs 4.98%/yr for FVC. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RYLD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for FVC.
Performance
RYLD vs. FVC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RYLD achieves a 8.33% return, which is significantly lower than FVC's 17.30% return.
RYLD
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 2.78%
- YTD
- 8.33%
- 6M
- 9.14%
- 1Y
- 21.47%
- 3Y*
- 7.45%
- 5Y*
- 2.69%
- 10Y*
- —
FVC
- 1D
- 1.40%
- 1M
- 11.30%
- YTD
- 17.30%
- 6M
- 17.97%
- 1Y
- 23.41%
- 3Y*
- 10.91%
- 5Y*
- 4.98%
- 10Y*
- 8.62%
RYLD vs. FVC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF | 8.33% | 5.65% | 10.13% | 0.27% | -13.03% | 22.13% | -0.44% | 8.92% |
FVC First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | 17.30% | 2.12% | 12.43% | -4.59% | -6.03% | 21.92% | 12.71% | 4.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between RYLD and FVC 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 | 0.71 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2019 | 0.73 |
The correlation between RYLD and FVC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.
RYLD vs. FVC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RYLD
FVC
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
RYLD
FVC
Industrials
RYLD
FVC
Technology
RYLD
FVC
Healthcare
RYLD
FVC
Consumer Cyclical
RYLD
FVC
Real Estate
RYLD
FVC
Energy
RYLD
FVC
Basic Materials
RYLD
FVC
-
Utilities
RYLD
FVC
-
Communication Services
RYLD
FVC
Consumer Defensive
RYLD
FVC
-
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
RYLD vs. FVC — Risk / Return Rank
RYLD
FVC
RYLD vs. FVC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) and First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC). 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.
| RYLD | FVC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.37 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.43 | 1.77 | +1.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.86 | 6.94 | +6.92 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RYLD | FVC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.03 | 1.82 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.19 | 0.31 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.32 | 0.50 | -0.18 |
Drawdowns
RYLD vs. FVC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RYLD drawdown since its inception was -41.53%, which is greater than FVC's maximum drawdown of -30.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RYLD and FVC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RYLD | FVC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.53% | -30.96% | -10.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.29% | -13.32% | +7.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.05% | -14.75% | -4.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.33% | -22.62% | +1.29% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -30.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.19% | 0.00% | -0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.84% | -7.06% | -1.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.55% | 3.38% | -1.83% |
Volatility
RYLD vs. FVC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) is 2.02%, while First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) has a volatility of 4.29%. This indicates that RYLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FVC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RYLD | FVC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.02% | 4.29% | -2.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.60% | 12.37% | -4.77% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.67% | 12.94% | -2.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.03% | 16.30% | -2.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.20% | 17.61% | -0.41% |
RYLD vs. FVC - Expense Ratio Comparison
RYLD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than FVC's 0.71% expense ratio.
Dividends
RYLD vs. FVC - Dividend Comparison
RYLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.65%, more than FVC's 1.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FVC First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | 1.92% | 2.57% | 0.78% | 1.89% | 1.50% | 0.09% | 0.21% | 1.07% | 0.24% | 0.63% | 0.67% |
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF | 11.65% | 12.00% | 12.03% | 12.64% | 13.49% | 12.35% | 10.76% | 6.43% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RYLD and FVC 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.
FVC has higher volatility (4.29%) compared to RYLD (2.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RYLD dropped -41.53% vs FVC's -30.96%.
On 5-year performance, FVC leads with 4.98% vs 2.69% for RYLD. On fees, RYLD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, RYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FVC has performed better with a 4.98% return vs 2.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for FVC.
RYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.65%, compared with 1.92% for FVC.
RYLD tracks CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index, while FVC tracks Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus Five Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for RYLD and 0.71% for FVC.
RYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.82), 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.
Find the right allocation for RYLD and FVC
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