PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RYLG vs. XYLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RYLG vs. XYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) and Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RYLG achieves a 12.45% return, which is significantly higher than XYLD's 4.96% return.


RYLG

1D
-0.97%
1M
3.55%
YTD
12.45%
6M
12.24%
1Y
29.67%
3Y*
12.54%
5Y*
10Y*

XYLD

1D
-0.15%
1M
2.00%
YTD
4.96%
6M
6.48%
1Y
17.66%
3Y*
11.27%
5Y*
7.72%
10Y*
8.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RYLG vs. XYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
RYLG
Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF
12.45%9.39%10.57%8.33%-1.56%
XYLD
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
4.96%8.02%19.49%11.10%1.70%

Correlation

The correlation between RYLG and XYLD is 0.72, 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

0.72

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2022

0.70

The correlation between RYLG and XYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

RYLG vs. XYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RYLG
XYLD

Industrials

17.5%
8.3%

Technology

16.8%
35.6%

Healthcare

16.5%
8.5%

Financial Services

16.0%
11.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
10.2%

Real Estate

6.2%
1.9%

Energy

6.2%
3.5%

Basic Materials

4.8%
1.8%

Utilities

2.9%
2.3%

Communication Services

2.5%
11.2%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
4.9%

Industrials

RYLG
17.5%
XYLD
8.3%

Technology

RYLG
16.8%
XYLD
35.6%

Healthcare

RYLG
16.5%
XYLD
8.5%

Financial Services

RYLG
16.0%
XYLD
11.8%

Consumer Cyclical

RYLG
8.4%
XYLD
10.2%

Real Estate

RYLG
6.2%
XYLD
1.9%

Energy

RYLG
6.2%
XYLD
3.5%

Basic Materials

RYLG
4.8%
XYLD
1.8%

Utilities

RYLG
2.9%
XYLD
2.3%

Communication Services

RYLG
2.5%
XYLD
11.2%

Consumer Defensive

RYLG
2.4%
XYLD
4.9%

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

RYLG vs. XYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

RYLG
RYLG Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
RYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
RYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
RYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
RYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

XYLD
XYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
XYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
XYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
XYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
XYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RYLG vs. XYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) and Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD). 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.


RYLGXYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.64

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.64

3.35

+0.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.04

17.84

-3.81

RYLG vs. XYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RYLG Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is comparable to the XYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RYLG and XYLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RYLGXYLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.01

2.71

-0.70

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

0.60

+0.02

Drawdowns

RYLG vs. XYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RYLG drawdown since its inception was -22.37%, smaller than the maximum XYLD drawdown of -33.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RYLG and XYLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RYLGXYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.37%

-33.46%

+11.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.18%

-5.29%

-2.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.37%

-15.53%

-6.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.97%

-0.15%

-0.82%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.13%

-3.72%

-0.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.12%

0.99%

+1.13%

Volatility

RYLG vs. XYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF (RYLG) has a higher volatility of 3.93% compared to Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD) at 0.88%. This indicates that RYLG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RYLGXYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.93%

0.88%

+3.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.67%

5.37%

+5.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.88%

6.55%

+8.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.17%

11.22%

+5.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.17%

14.21%

+2.96%

RYLG vs. XYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

RYLG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than XYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

RYLG vs. XYLD - Dividend Comparison

RYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.34%, less than XYLD's 10.52% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RYLG
Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call & Growth ETF
10.34%10.82%23.73%5.78%4.36%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XYLD
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
10.52%10.51%11.54%10.51%13.43%9.07%7.93%5.76%7.12%5.18%3.23%4.65%

Frequently Asked Questions


RYLG and XYLD have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RYLG has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to XYLD (0.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RYLG dropped -22.37% vs XYLD's -33.46%.

On 3-year performance, RYLG leads with 12.54% vs 11.27% for XYLD. On fees, RYLG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XYLD has been the lower-risk option at 0.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, RYLG has performed better with a 12.54% return vs 11.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RYLG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for XYLD.

XYLD has the higher dividend yield at 10.52%, compared with 10.34% for RYLG.

RYLG tracks Cboe Russell 2000 Half BuyWrite Index, while XYLD tracks Cboe S&P 500 BuyWrite Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RYLG and 0.60% for XYLD.

XYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.01), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RYLG and XYLD

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