TYLG vs. RYLD

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

TYLG (Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF) and RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Global X - TYLG tracks the Cboe S&P Technology Select Sector Half BuyWrite Index - Benchmark TR Gross while RYLD tracks the CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TYLG returned 21.84%/yr vs 8.70%/yr for RYLD. Their 0.63 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

TYLG vs. RYLD - 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 Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). 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 higher than RYLD's 13.48% 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%

RYLD

• 1D: 1.06%
• 1M: 2.27%
• 6M: 10.40%
• YTD: 13.48%
• 1Y: 26.26%
• 3Y*: 8.70%
• 5Y*: 3.43%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.95%

*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)
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	$9.87M	$9.43M	$9.08M
TYLG Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF	$118.02K	$128.07K	$139.81K

TYLG vs. RYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
TYLG Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF	17.59%	16.84%	20.57%	41.56%	-1.78%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	13.48%	5.65%	10.13%	0.27%	-1.10%

Correlation

The correlation between TYLG and RYLD is 0.67, 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.	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 22, 2022	0.63

The correlation between TYLG and RYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

TYLG vs. RYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TYLG	RYLD
Financial Services	54.7%	17.8%
Technology	47.0%	14.5%
Communication Services	0.8%	2.2%
Energy	0.1%	5.5%
Industrials	0.0%	14.1%
Basic Materials	-	4.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	9.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.6%
Healthcare	-	20.3%
Real Estate	-	6.8%
Utilities	-	2.8%

Return for Risk

TYLG vs. RYLD — 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

RYLD

RYLD Risk / Return Rank: 93
RYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
RYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
RYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 94
RYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
RYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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. RYLD - 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 Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD). 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	RYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	2.50	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.30	3.52	-1.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.52	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.02	4.19	-1.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.99	17.17	-7.18

TYLG vs. RYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TYLG Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is lower than the RYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TYLG and RYLD, 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. RYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TYLG drawdown since its inception was -24.01%, smaller than the maximum RYLD drawdown of -41.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TYLG and RYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	TYLG	RYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.01%	-41.53%	+17.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.78%	-6.29%	-4.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.01%	-19.05%	-4.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.60%	0.00%	-5.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.82%	-8.65%	+5.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.26%	1.53%	+1.73%

Volatility

TYLG vs. RYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF (TYLG) has a higher volatility of 8.08% compared to Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) at 2.30%. This indicates that TYLG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TYLG	RYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.08%	2.30%	+5.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.64%	7.74%	+8.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.20%	10.58%	+8.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.73%	13.98%	+5.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.73%	17.04%	+2.69%

TYLG vs. RYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both TYLG and RYLD have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

TYLG vs. RYLD - Dividend Comparison

TYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.78%, less than RYLD's 11.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	11.50%	12.00%	12.03%	12.64%	13.49%	12.35%	10.76%	6.43%
TYLG Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF	8.78%	7.66%	7.24%	11.89%	0.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TYLG and RYLD in my portfolio?

TYLG and RYLD have a correlation of 0.67, 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 RYLD?

TYLG has higher volatility (8.08%) compared to RYLD (2.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TYLG dropped -24.01% vs RYLD's -41.53%.

Which ETF is better, TYLG or RYLD?

On 3-year performance, TYLG leads with 21.84% vs 8.70% for RYLD. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, RYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TYLG or RYLD?

Over the 3-year period, TYLG has performed better with a 21.84% return vs 8.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TYLG or RYLD?

TYLG and RYLD have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

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

RYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.50%, compared with 8.78% for TYLG.

What is the main difference between TYLG and RYLD?

TYLG tracks Cboe S&P Technology Select Sector Half BuyWrite Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while RYLD tracks CBOE Russell 2000 BuyWrite Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 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.