RYLD vs. OMAH

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) and OMAH (VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. RYLD is passively managed, while OMAH is actively managed. Over the past year, RYLD returned 20.74% vs 11.47% for OMAH. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RYLD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for OMAH.

Performance

RYLD vs. OMAH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RYLD achieves a 9.51% return, which is significantly higher than OMAH's 5.30% return.

RYLD

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: 2.12%
• YTD: 9.51%
• 6M: 8.37%
• 1Y: 20.74%
• 3Y*: 8.72%
• 5Y*: 2.45%
• 10Y*: —

OMAH

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: -1.97%
• YTD: 5.30%
• 6M: 5.12%
• 1Y: 11.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RYLD vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	9.51%	8.87%
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	5.30%	6.55%

Correlation

The correlation between RYLD and OMAH is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2025	0.51

The correlation between RYLD and OMAH shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.51 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RYLD vs. OMAH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RYLD	OMAH
Technology	19.0%	11.6%
Industrials	18.0%	4.9%
Healthcare	16.3%	4.4%
Financial Services	15.5%	37.3%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	4.1%
Real Estate	5.9%	-
Energy	5.4%	8.8%
Basic Materials	4.7%	-
Utilities	2.8%	-
Communication Services	2.4%	19.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	13.2%

Return for Risk

RYLD vs. OMAH — Risk / Return Rank

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

RYLD

RYLD Risk / Return Rank: 68
RYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
RYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
RYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 73
RYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
RYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 74

OMAH

OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 51
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 40
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

RYLD vs. OMAH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). 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.

	RYLD	OMAH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.96	1.44	+0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.76	2.01	+0.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.25	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.31	3.84	-0.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.37	9.13	+4.24

RYLD vs. OMAH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RYLD Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is higher than the OMAH Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RYLD and OMAH, 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

RYLD vs. OMAH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RYLD drawdown since its inception was -41.53%, which is greater than OMAH's maximum drawdown of -11.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RYLD and OMAH.

Drawdown Indicators

	RYLD	OMAH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.53%	-11.83%	-29.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.29%	-3.00%	-3.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.05%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.33%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.50%	-1.97%	+1.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.78%	-1.27%	-7.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.55%	1.26%	+0.29%

Volatility

RYLD vs. OMAH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) is 2.00%, while VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) has a volatility of 2.21%. This indicates that RYLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than OMAH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RYLD	OMAH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.00%	2.21%	-0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.80%	5.58%	+2.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.66%	8.04%	+2.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.05%	13.03%	+1.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.15%	13.03%	+4.12%

RYLD vs. OMAH - Expense Ratio Comparison

RYLD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than OMAH's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

RYLD vs. OMAH - Dividend Comparison

RYLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.73%, less than OMAH's 14.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	14.05%	12.86%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	11.73%	12.00%	12.03%	12.64%	13.49%	12.35%	10.76%	6.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RYLD and OMAH in my portfolio?

RYLD and OMAH have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RYLD or OMAH?

OMAH has higher volatility (2.21%) compared to RYLD (2.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RYLD dropped -41.53% vs OMAH's -11.83%.

Which ETF is better, RYLD or OMAH?

On 1-year performance, RYLD leads with 20.74% vs 11.47% for OMAH. On fees, RYLD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, RYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RYLD or OMAH?

Over the 1-year period, RYLD has performed better with a 20.74% return vs 11.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RYLD or OMAH?

RYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for OMAH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RYLD or OMAH?

OMAH has the higher dividend yield at 14.05%, compared with 11.73% for RYLD.

What is the main difference between RYLD and OMAH?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and VistaShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for RYLD and 0.95% for OMAH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.96 vs 1.44), 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.