RYLD vs. RPAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) and RPAR (RPAR Risk Parity ETF) are both Hedge Fund funds. RYLD is passively managed, while RPAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, RYLD returned 2.69%/yr vs 1.76%/yr for RPAR. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RYLD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.51%/yr for RPAR.

Performance

RYLD vs. RPAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) and RPAR Risk Parity ETF (RPAR). 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 higher than RPAR's 7.53% return.

RYLD

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

RPAR

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 1.78%
• YTD: 7.53%
• 6M: 7.10%
• 1Y: 21.22%
• 3Y*: 9.22%
• 5Y*: 1.76%
• 10Y*: —

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

RYLD vs. RPAR - 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%	0.14%
RPAR RPAR Risk Parity ETF	7.53%	17.91%	0.06%	6.03%	-22.82%	7.56%	19.40%	0.11%

Correlation

The correlation between RYLD and RPAR is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.47
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2019	0.45

RYLD vs. RPAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RYLD	RPAR
Financial Services	104.9%	35.9%
Industrials	17.5%	2.1%
Technology	16.8%	0.1%
Healthcare	16.5%	5.1%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	0.1%
Real Estate	6.2%	-0.0%
Energy	6.2%	5.9%
Basic Materials	4.8%	6.4%
Utilities	2.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	2.5%	4.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	0.3%

Return for Risk

RYLD vs. RPAR — 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

RPAR

RPAR Risk / Return Rank: 57
RPAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
RPAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
RPAR Omega Ratio Rank: 60
RPAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
RPAR Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. RPAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) and RPAR Risk Parity ETF (RPAR). 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	RPAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	2.09	-0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.86	2.90	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.37	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.43	2.63	+0.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.86	8.71	+5.15
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. RPAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RYLD Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is comparable to the RPAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RYLD and RPAR, 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	RPAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.03	2.09	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.19	0.14	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	0.36	-0.05

Drawdowns

RYLD vs. RPAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RYLD drawdown since its inception was -41.53%, which is greater than RPAR's maximum drawdown of -30.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RYLD and RPAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	RYLD	RPAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.53%	-30.16%	-11.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.29%	-8.10%	+1.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.05%	-13.20%	-5.85%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.33%	-30.16%	+8.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-2.64%	+2.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.84%	-11.61%	+2.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.55%	2.44%	-0.89%

Volatility

RYLD vs. RPAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) is 2.02%, while RPAR Risk Parity ETF (RPAR) has a volatility of 3.56%. This indicates that RYLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RPAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RYLD	RPAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.02%	3.56%	-1.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.60%	8.37%	-0.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.67%	10.20%	+0.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.03%	12.40%	+1.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.20%	12.69%	+4.51%

RYLD vs. RPAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

RYLD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RPAR's 0.51% expense ratio.

Dividends

RYLD vs. RPAR - Dividend Comparison

RYLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.65%, more than RPAR's 2.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
RPAR RPAR Risk Parity ETF	2.07%	2.55%	2.51%	3.16%	4.01%	2.02%	0.76%	0.23%
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 RPAR in my portfolio?

RYLD and RPAR have a correlation of 0.47, 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 RPAR?

RPAR has higher volatility (3.56%) compared to RYLD (2.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RYLD dropped -41.53% vs RPAR's -30.16%.

Which ETF is better, RYLD or RPAR?

On 5-year performance, RYLD leads with 2.69% vs 1.76% for RPAR. On fees, RPAR is cheaper at 0.51% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, RYLD or RPAR?

Over the 5-year period, RYLD has performed better with a 2.69% return vs 1.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RYLD or RPAR?

RPAR is cheaper with a 0.51% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for RYLD.

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

RYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.65%, compared with 2.07% for RPAR.

What is the main difference between RYLD and RPAR?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Toroso Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for RYLD and 0.51% for RPAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RPAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 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.