XLCI vs. RYLD

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

XLCI (State Street Communication Services Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF) and RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. XLCI is actively managed, while RYLD is passively managed. Over the past year, XLCI returned 4.28% vs 24.93% for RYLD. Their 0.43 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. XLCI charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for RYLD.

Performance

XLCI vs. RYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Communication Services Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF (XLCI) 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, XLCI achieves a -2.58% return, which is significantly lower than RYLD's 12.29% return.

XLCI

• 1D: 1.54%
• 1M: -0.56%
• 6M: -4.49%
• YTD: -2.58%
• 1Y: 4.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.98%

RYLD

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 1.19%
• 6M: 10.16%
• YTD: 12.29%
• 1Y: 24.93%
• 3Y*: 8.04%
• 5Y*: 3.15%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.81%

*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	$10.07M	$9.36M	$9.08M
XLCI State Street Communication Services Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF	$102.51K	$79.36K	$72.31K

XLCI vs. RYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XLCI State Street Communication Services Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF	-2.58%	6.73%
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	12.29%	8.70%

Correlation

The correlation between XLCI and RYLD is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2025	0.43

XLCI vs. RYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XLCI	RYLD
Communication Services	100.0%	2.2%
Financial Services	99.8%	17.8%
Basic Materials	-	4.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	9.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.6%
Energy	-	5.5%
Healthcare	-	20.3%
Industrials	-	14.1%
Real Estate	-	6.8%
Technology	-	14.5%
Utilities	-	2.8%

Return for Risk

XLCI vs. RYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLCI

XLCI Risk / Return Rank: 18
XLCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
XLCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
XLCI Omega Ratio Rank: 16
XLCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
XLCI Martin Ratio Rank: 20

RYLD

RYLD Risk / Return Rank: 90
RYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
RYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
RYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 92
RYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
RYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

XLCI vs. RYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Communication Services Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF (XLCI) 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.

	XLCI	RYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.29	2.17	-1.88
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.47	3.05	-2.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.45	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.42	3.67	-3.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.23	15.02	-13.79

XLCI vs. RYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLCI Sharpe Ratio is 0.29, which is lower than the RYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLCI 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

XLCI vs. RYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLCI drawdown since its inception was -8.44%, smaller than the maximum RYLD drawdown of -41.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLCI and RYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	XLCI	RYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.44%	-41.53%	+33.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.44%	-6.29%	-2.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.05%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.54%	-0.37%	-5.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.06%	-8.65%	+6.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.86%	1.54%	+1.32%

Volatility

XLCI vs. RYLD - Volatility Comparison

State Street Communication Services Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF (XLCI) has a higher volatility of 5.62% compared to Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF (RYLD) at 2.07%. This indicates that XLCI'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

	XLCI	RYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.62%	2.07%	+3.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.27%	7.73%	+2.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.32%	10.67%	+1.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.29%	13.97%	-1.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.29%	17.04%	-4.75%

XLCI vs. RYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLCI has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than RYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

XLCI vs. RYLD - Dividend Comparison

XLCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.73%, which matches RYLD's 11.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF	11.62%	12.00%	12.03%	12.64%	13.49%	12.35%	10.76%	6.43%
XLCI State Street Communication Services Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF	11.73%	5.23%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XLCI and RYLD in my portfolio?

XLCI and RYLD have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XLCI or RYLD?

XLCI has higher volatility (5.62%) compared to RYLD (2.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLCI dropped -8.44% vs RYLD's -41.53%.

Which ETF is better, XLCI or RYLD?

On 1-year performance, RYLD leads with 24.93% vs 4.28% for XLCI. On fees, XLCI is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RYLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XLCI or RYLD?

Over the 1-year period, RYLD has performed better with a 24.93% return vs 4.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XLCI or RYLD?

XLCI is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for RYLD.

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

XLCI has the higher dividend yield at 11.73%, compared with 11.62% for RYLD.

What is the main difference between XLCI and RYLD?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XLCI and 0.60% for RYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.17 vs 0.29), 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.