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

Performance

SPFF vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X SuperIncome Preferred ETF (SPFF) 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, SPFF achieves a 6.91% return, which is significantly lower than QYLD's 7.88% return. Over the past 10 years, SPFF has underperformed QYLD with an annualized return of 3.13%, while QYLD has yielded a comparatively higher 9.80% annualized return.


SPFF

1D
-0.20%
1M
3.90%
YTD
6.91%
6M
8.28%
1Y
18.49%
3Y*
8.98%
5Y*
2.16%
10Y*
3.13%

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)

SPFF vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SPFF
Global X SuperIncome Preferred ETF
6.91%7.52%8.62%3.00%-14.29%5.15%6.91%13.04%-2.55%1.80%
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 SPFF and QYLD is 0.53, 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

0.53

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

0.42

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

0.47

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

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2013

0.38

The correlation between SPFF and QYLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (all time) to 0.53 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SPFF vs. QYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SPFF
QYLD

Financial Services

54.4%
0.2%

Technology

18.3%
53.8%

Utilities

14.2%
1.4%

Healthcare

3.2%
4.2%

Consumer Cyclical

3.0%
12.3%

Basic Materials

2.6%
1.1%

Real Estate

2.1%
0.1%

Communication Services

2.0%
15.8%

Industrials

1.8%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

7.7%

Energy

-

0.6%

Financial Services

SPFF
54.4%
QYLD
0.2%

Technology

SPFF
18.3%
QYLD
53.8%

Utilities

SPFF
14.2%
QYLD
1.4%

Healthcare

SPFF
3.2%
QYLD
4.2%

Consumer Cyclical

SPFF
3.0%
QYLD
12.3%

Basic Materials

SPFF
2.6%
QYLD
1.1%

Real Estate

SPFF
2.1%
QYLD
0.1%

Communication Services

SPFF
2.0%
QYLD
15.8%

Industrials

SPFF
1.8%
QYLD
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

SPFF

-

QYLD
7.7%

Energy

SPFF

-

QYLD
0.6%

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

SPFF vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPFF
SPFF Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
SPFF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPFF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPFF Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
SPFF Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPFF Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
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.

SPFF vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X SuperIncome Preferred ETF (SPFF) 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.


SPFFQYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.85

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.63

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.45

4.84

-2.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.46

28.36

-20.90

SPFF vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPFF Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is lower than the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPFF 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


SPFFQYLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.96

2.80

-0.85

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

0.58

-0.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.23

0.63

-0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.59

-0.29

Drawdowns

SPFF vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPFF drawdown since its inception was -35.92%, which is greater than QYLD's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPFF and QYLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SPFFQYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.92%

-24.75%

-11.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.58%

-4.97%

-2.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.51%

-19.06%

+6.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.88%

-24.61%

+1.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.92%

-24.75%

-11.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.20%

-0.06%

-0.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.06%

-3.84%

-0.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.49%

0.85%

+1.64%

Volatility

SPFF vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X SuperIncome Preferred ETF (SPFF) has a higher volatility of 2.97% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 1.85%. This indicates that SPFF'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


SPFFQYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.97%

1.85%

+1.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.29%

7.12%

+0.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.53%

8.58%

+0.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.93%

14.70%

-3.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.51%

15.49%

-1.98%

SPFF vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPFF has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

SPFF vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

SPFF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.34%, 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%
SPFF
Global X SuperIncome Preferred ETF
6.34%6.47%6.39%6.64%7.15%5.78%5.75%5.97%7.60%7.24%7.04%7.50%

Frequently Asked Questions


SPFF and QYLD have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SPFF has higher volatility (2.97%) compared to QYLD (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPFF dropped -35.92% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

On 10-year performance, QYLD leads with 9.80% vs 3.13% for SPFF. On fees, SPFF is cheaper at 0.58% 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 3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SPFF is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.46%, compared with 6.34% for SPFF.

SPFF is categorized as Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. SPFF tracks S&P Enhanced Yield North American Preferred Stock Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for SPFF and 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.96), 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 SPFF 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