PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SDEM vs. QYLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SDEM vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF (SDEM) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SDEM achieves a 10.35% return, which is significantly higher than QYLD's 7.88% return. Over the past 10 years, SDEM has underperformed QYLD with an annualized return of 4.84%, while QYLD has yielded a comparatively higher 9.80% annualized return.


SDEM

1D
-1.52%
1M
1.02%
YTD
10.35%
6M
10.30%
1Y
30.03%
3Y*
19.61%
5Y*
4.14%
10Y*
4.84%

QYLD

1D
-0.06%
1M
1.62%
YTD
7.88%
6M
9.97%
1Y
23.93%
3Y*
13.80%
5Y*
8.43%
10Y*
9.80%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SDEM vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SDEM
Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF
10.35%32.01%4.02%12.64%-21.53%2.11%-11.13%17.56%-17.40%16.57%
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
7.88%9.28%19.35%22.77%-19.08%10.41%8.72%22.69%-3.07%18.79%

Correlation

The correlation between SDEM and QYLD is 0.52, 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

0.52

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

0.41

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2015

0.45

The correlation between SDEM and QYLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (3 years) to 0.52 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SDEM vs. QYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SDEM
QYLD

Financial Services

24.2%
0.2%

Industrials

12.9%
2.8%

Utilities

7.9%
1.4%

Communication Services

5.7%
15.8%

Consumer Defensive

5.6%
7.7%

Technology

5.6%
53.8%

Consumer Cyclical

5.5%
12.3%

Energy

5.1%
0.6%

Real Estate

3.2%
0.1%

Healthcare

2.0%
4.2%

Basic Materials

1.2%
1.1%

Financial Services

SDEM
24.2%
QYLD
0.2%

Industrials

SDEM
12.9%
QYLD
2.8%

Utilities

SDEM
7.9%
QYLD
1.4%

Communication Services

SDEM
5.7%
QYLD
15.8%

Consumer Defensive

SDEM
5.6%
QYLD
7.7%

Technology

SDEM
5.6%
QYLD
53.8%

Consumer Cyclical

SDEM
5.5%
QYLD
12.3%

Energy

SDEM
5.1%
QYLD
0.6%

Real Estate

SDEM
3.2%
QYLD
0.1%

Healthcare

SDEM
2.0%
QYLD
4.2%

Basic Materials

SDEM
1.2%
QYLD
1.1%

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

SDEM vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

SDEM
SDEM Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
SDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
SDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
SDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
SDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

QYLD
QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
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.

SDEM vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF (SDEM) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). 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.


SDEMQYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.63

-0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.34

4.84

-1.50

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.64

28.36

-16.72

SDEM vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SDEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is comparable to the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SDEM and QYLD, 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


SDEMQYLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.22

2.80

-0.58

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

0.58

-0.34

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.25

0.63

-0.38

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.18

0.59

-0.41

Drawdowns

SDEM vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SDEM drawdown since its inception was -47.38%, which is greater than QYLD's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SDEM and QYLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SDEMQYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.38%

-24.75%

-22.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.03%

-4.97%

-4.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.34%

-19.06%

+6.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-36.70%

-24.61%

-12.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.38%

-24.75%

-22.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.20%

-0.06%

-4.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.71%

-3.84%

-16.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.59%

0.85%

+1.74%

Volatility

SDEM vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF (SDEM) has a higher volatility of 4.90% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 1.85%. This indicates that SDEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SDEMQYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.90%

1.85%

+3.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.14%

7.12%

+4.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.57%

8.58%

+4.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.43%

14.70%

+2.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.22%

15.49%

+3.73%

SDEM vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

SDEM has a 0.67% expense ratio, which is higher than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

SDEM vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

SDEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.42%, less than QYLD's 11.46% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
11.46%11.55%12.50%11.78%13.75%12.85%11.16%9.84%12.44%7.69%9.15%9.42%
SDEM
Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF
5.42%5.27%7.28%7.50%8.86%8.14%6.30%6.47%6.55%5.01%5.06%6.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


SDEM and QYLD have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SDEM has higher volatility (4.90%) compared to QYLD (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SDEM dropped -47.38% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

On 10-year performance, QYLD leads with 9.80% vs 4.84% for SDEM. On fees, QYLD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QYLD has been the lower-risk option at 1.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QYLD has performed better with a 9.80% return vs 4.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.67% for SDEM.

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.46%, compared with 5.42% for SDEM.

SDEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. SDEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Top 50 Dividend, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Their fees differ too: 0.67% for SDEM and 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 2.22), 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 SDEM and QYLD

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