RYLD vs. QTR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) and QTR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RYLD is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index, while QTR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RYLD returned 7.45%/yr vs 22.93%/yr for QTR. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

RYLD vs. QTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RYLD achieves a 8.33% return, which is significantly lower than QTR's 17.64% return.

RYLD

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 2.78%
• YTD: 8.33%
• 6M: 9.14%
• 1Y: 21.47%
• 3Y*: 7.45%
• 5Y*: 2.69%
• 10Y*: —

QTR

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 10.52%
• YTD: 17.64%
• 6M: 15.72%
• 1Y: 33.76%
• 3Y*: 22.93%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RYLD vs. QTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	8.33%	5.65%	10.13%	0.27%	-13.03%	1.74%
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	17.64%	14.52%	21.46%	45.53%	-29.94%	4.16%

Correlation

The correlation between RYLD and QTR is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 27, 2021	0.61

The correlation between RYLD and QTR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

RYLD vs. QTR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RYLD	QTR
Financial Services	104.9%	0.2%
Industrials	17.5%	2.8%
Technology	16.8%	53.8%
Healthcare	16.5%	4.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	12.2%
Real Estate	6.2%	0.1%
Energy	6.2%	0.6%
Basic Materials	4.8%	1.1%
Utilities	2.9%	1.4%
Communication Services	2.5%	15.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	7.7%

Return for Risk

RYLD vs. QTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

RYLD

RYLD Risk / Return Rank: 66
RYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
RYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
RYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
RYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 73

QTR

QTR Risk / Return Rank: 64
QTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
QTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
QTR Omega Ratio Rank: 68
QTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
QTR Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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. QTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR). 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	QTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	2.40	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.86	3.22	-0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.41	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.43	2.76	+0.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.86	9.47	+4.39
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RYLD vs. QTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RYLD Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is comparable to the QTR Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RYLD and QTR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RYLD	QTR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.03	2.40	-0.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.19	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	0.68	-0.37

Drawdowns

RYLD vs. QTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RYLD drawdown since its inception was -41.53%, which is greater than QTR's maximum drawdown of -31.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RYLD and QTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	RYLD	QTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.53%	-31.72%	-9.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.29%	-12.29%	+6.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.05%	-18.99%	-0.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.33%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-0.24%	+0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.84%	-8.84%	0.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.55%	3.57%	-2.02%

Volatility

RYLD vs. QTR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) is 2.02%, while Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) has a volatility of 4.52%. This indicates that RYLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RYLD	QTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.02%	4.52%	-2.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.60%	10.68%	-3.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.67%	14.14%	-3.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.03%	18.10%	-4.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.20%	18.10%	-0.90%

RYLD vs. QTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both RYLD and QTR have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

RYLD vs. QTR - Dividend Comparison

RYLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.65%, less than QTR's 15.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	15.96%	18.77%	0.50%	0.53%	0.36%	1.90%	0.00%	0.00%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	11.65%	12.00%	12.03%	12.64%	13.49%	12.35%	10.76%	6.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RYLD and QTR in my portfolio?

RYLD and QTR have a correlation of 0.66, 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 QTR?

QTR has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to RYLD (2.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RYLD dropped -41.53% vs QTR's -31.72%.

Which ETF is better, RYLD or QTR?

On 3-year performance, QTR leads with 22.93% vs 7.45% for RYLD. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, RYLD or QTR?

Over the 3-year period, QTR has performed better with a 22.93% return vs 7.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RYLD or QTR?

RYLD and QTR have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

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

QTR has the higher dividend yield at 15.96%, compared with 11.65% for RYLD.

What is the main difference between RYLD and QTR?

RYLD is categorized as Hedge Fund, while QTR is Nasdaq-100. RYLD tracks CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index, while QTR tracks NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.03), 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.