TYLG vs. AMDW

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

TYLG (Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF) and AMDW (Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. TYLG is passively managed, while AMDW is actively managed. Over the past year, TYLG returned 32.47% vs 214.50% for AMDW. Their 0.71 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. TYLG charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for AMDW.

Performance

TYLG vs. AMDW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF (TYLG) and Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF (AMDW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TYLG achieves a 17.59% return, which is significantly lower than AMDW's 150.89% return.

TYLG

• 1D: 1.38%
• 1M: -0.29%
• 6M: 16.32%
• YTD: 17.59%
• 1Y: 32.47%
• 3Y*: 21.84%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 25.33%

AMDW

• 1D: 1.68%
• 1M: -8.62%
• 6M: 113.70%
• YTD: 150.89%
• 1Y: 214.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 231.82%

*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)
AMDW Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF	$10.29M	$9.36M	$8.60M
TYLG Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF	$118.02K	$128.07K	$139.81K

TYLG vs. AMDW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TYLG Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF	17.59%	11.79%
AMDW Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF	150.89%	36.56%

Correlation

The correlation between TYLG and AMDW is 0.71, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2025	0.71

The correlation between TYLG and AMDW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

TYLG vs. AMDW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TYLG	AMDW
Financial Services	54.7%	-
Technology	47.0%	19.3%
Communication Services	0.8%	-
Energy	0.1%	-
Industrials	0.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

TYLG vs. AMDW — Risk / Return Rank

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

TYLG

TYLG Risk / Return Rank: 72
TYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
TYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
TYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 66
TYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
TYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 75

AMDW

AMDW Risk / Return Rank: 89
AMDW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
AMDW Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
AMDW Omega Ratio Rank: 83
AMDW Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
AMDW Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

TYLG vs. AMDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF (TYLG) and Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF (AMDW). 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.

	TYLG	AMDW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	2.52	-0.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.30	3.02	-0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.37	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.02	6.23	-3.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.99	12.22	-2.23

TYLG vs. AMDW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TYLG Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is lower than the AMDW Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TYLG and AMDW, 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

TYLG vs. AMDW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TYLG drawdown since its inception was -24.01%, smaller than the maximum AMDW drawdown of -34.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TYLG and AMDW.

Drawdown Indicators

	TYLG	AMDW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.01%	-34.64%	+10.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.78%	-34.64%	+23.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.01%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.60%	-20.07%	+14.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.82%	-13.99%	+11.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.26%	17.63%	-14.37%

Volatility

TYLG vs. AMDW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF (TYLG) is 8.08%, while Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF (AMDW) has a volatility of 28.57%. This indicates that TYLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMDW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TYLG	AMDW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.08%	28.57%	-20.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.64%	66.95%	-50.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.20%	85.77%	-66.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.73%	84.89%	-65.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.73%	84.89%	-65.16%

TYLG vs. AMDW - Expense Ratio Comparison

TYLG has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than AMDW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

TYLG vs. AMDW - Dividend Comparison

TYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.78%, less than AMDW's 55.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
AMDW Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF	55.51%	34.78%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TYLG Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF	8.78%	7.66%	7.24%	11.89%	0.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TYLG and AMDW in my portfolio?

TYLG and AMDW have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TYLG or AMDW?

AMDW has higher volatility (28.57%) compared to TYLG (8.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TYLG dropped -24.01% vs AMDW's -34.64%.

Which ETF is better, TYLG or AMDW?

On 1-year performance, AMDW leads with 214.50% vs 32.47% for TYLG. On fees, TYLG is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, TYLG has been the lower-risk option at 8.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TYLG or AMDW?

Over the 1-year period, AMDW has performed better with a 214.50% return vs 32.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TYLG or AMDW?

TYLG is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AMDW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TYLG or AMDW?

AMDW has the higher dividend yield at 55.51%, compared with 8.78% for TYLG.

What is the main difference between TYLG and AMDW?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for TYLG and 0.99% for AMDW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AMDW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 1.70), 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.