TSLW vs. LQTI

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

TSLW (Roundhill TSLA WeeklyPay™ ETF) and LQTI (FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TSLW returned -3.40% vs 1.01% for LQTI. Their 0.12 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. TSLW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LQTI.

Performance

TSLW vs. LQTI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill TSLA WeeklyPay™ ETF (TSLW) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TSLW achieves a -38.16% return, which is significantly lower than LQTI's -1.60% return.

TSLW

• 1D: 1.15%
• 1M: -25.15%
• 6M: -34.54%
• YTD: -38.16%
• 1Y: -3.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -14.25%

LQTI

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: -2.24%
• 6M: -1.58%
• YTD: -1.60%
• 1Y: 1.01%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.32%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	$2.40M	$2.20M	$1.68M
TSLW Roundhill TSLA WeeklyPay™ ETF	$2.02M	$1.80M	$2.69M

TSLW vs. LQTI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TSLW Roundhill TSLA WeeklyPay™ ETF	-38.16%	35.28%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	-1.60%	5.40%

Correlation

The correlation between TSLW and LQTI is 0.16, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 2, 2025	0.12

Return for Risk

TSLW vs. LQTI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

TSLW

TSLW Risk / Return Rank: 10
TSLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
TSLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
TSLW Omega Ratio Rank: 12
TSLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
TSLW Martin Ratio Rank: 9

LQTI

LQTI Risk / Return Rank: 18
LQTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
LQTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
LQTI Omega Ratio Rank: 16
LQTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
LQTI Martin Ratio Rank: 20

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

TSLW vs. LQTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill TSLA WeeklyPay™ ETF (TSLW) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	TSLW	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.10	0.35	-0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.25	0.52	-0.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.03	1.06	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.12	0.53	-0.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.29	1.35	-1.64

TSLW vs. LQTI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TSLW Sharpe Ratio is -0.10, which is lower than the LQTI Sharpe Ratio of 0.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TSLW and LQTI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

TSLW vs. LQTI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TSLW drawdown since its inception was -47.19%, which is greater than LQTI's maximum drawdown of -3.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TSLW and LQTI.

Drawdown Indicators

	TSLW	LQTI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.19%	-3.41%	-43.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-47.19%	-3.41%	-43.78%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-44.27%	-3.17%	-41.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.92%	-0.98%	-13.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	19.01%	1.34%	+17.67%

Volatility

TSLW vs. LQTI - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill TSLA WeeklyPay™ ETF (TSLW) has a higher volatility of 24.91% compared to FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) at 1.44%. This indicates that TSLW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQTI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TSLW	LQTI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	24.91%	1.44%	+23.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	41.72%	4.14%	+37.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	55.54%	5.19%	+50.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	58.84%	5.90%	+52.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	58.84%	5.90%	+52.94%

TSLW vs. LQTI - Expense Ratio Comparison

TSLW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than LQTI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

TSLW vs. LQTI - Dividend Comparison

TSLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 121.20%, more than LQTI's 9.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	8.54%	7.01%
TSLW Roundhill TSLA WeeklyPay™ ETF	121.20%	49.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TSLW and LQTI in my portfolio?

TSLW and LQTI have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TSLW or LQTI?

TSLW has higher volatility (24.91%) compared to LQTI (1.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TSLW dropped -47.19% vs LQTI's -3.41%.

Which ETF is better, TSLW or LQTI?

On 1-year performance, LQTI leads with 1.01% vs -3.40% for TSLW. On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LQTI has been the lower-risk option at 1.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TSLW or LQTI?

Over the 1-year period, LQTI has performed better with a 1.01% return vs -3.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TSLW or LQTI?

LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for TSLW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TSLW or LQTI?

TSLW has the higher dividend yield at 121.20%, compared with 8.54% for LQTI.

What is the main difference between TSLW and LQTI?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for TSLW and 0.65% for LQTI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LQTI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.35 vs -0.10), 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.