PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XQQ.TO (iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and QQCC.TO (Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Over the past 10 years, XQQ.TO returned 19.70%/yr vs 10.87%/yr for QQCC.TO. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XQQ.TO charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for QQCC.TO.

Performance

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO) and Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XQQ.TO achieves a 19.81% return, which is significantly higher than QQCC.TO's 16.94% return. Over the past 10 years, XQQ.TO has outperformed QQCC.TO with an annualized return of 19.70%, while QQCC.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 10.87% annualized return.

XQQ.TO

1D
-0.27%
1M
10.58%
YTD
19.81%
6M
18.06%
1Y
38.49%
3Y*
26.43%
5Y*
15.31%
10Y*
19.70%

QQCC.TO

1D
0.69%
1M
10.18%
YTD
16.94%
6M
14.76%
1Y
35.05%
3Y*
23.56%
5Y*
15.67%
10Y*
10.87%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XQQ.TO
iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		19.81%18.38%24.23%52.23%-33.67%22.29%45.23%37.48%-2.33%31.83%
QQCC.TO
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF		16.94%11.64%33.48%35.99%-8.51%7.92%-3.26%16.18%-15.89%18.77%

Correlation

The correlation between XQQ.TO and QQCC.TO is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.86

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

0.87

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

0.71

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

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2011

0.56

Over the past year, XQQ.TO and QQCC.TO have become more correlated (0.86) than their long-term average of 0.56, meaning their price movements have been converging.

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XQQ.TO
QQCC.TO

Technology

53.7%
50.5%

Communication Services

15.8%
16.1%

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%
12.6%

Consumer Defensive

7.7%
8.6%

Healthcare

4.2%
5.1%

Industrials

3.1%
3.3%

Utilities

1.4%
1.5%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.3%

Energy

0.6%
0.7%

Financial Services

0.2%
0.2%

Real Estate

0.1%
0.1%

Technology

XQQ.TO
53.7%
QQCC.TO
50.5%

Communication Services

XQQ.TO
15.8%
QQCC.TO
16.1%

Consumer Cyclical

XQQ.TO
12.2%
QQCC.TO
12.6%

Consumer Defensive

XQQ.TO
7.7%
QQCC.TO
8.6%

Healthcare

XQQ.TO
4.2%
QQCC.TO
5.1%

Industrials

XQQ.TO
3.1%
QQCC.TO
3.3%

Utilities

XQQ.TO
1.4%
QQCC.TO
1.5%

Basic Materials

XQQ.TO
1.1%
QQCC.TO
1.3%

Energy

XQQ.TO
0.6%
QQCC.TO
0.7%

Financial Services

XQQ.TO
0.2%
QQCC.TO
0.2%

Real Estate

XQQ.TO
0.1%
QQCC.TO
0.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF

Often compared with XQQ.TO:
XQQ.TO vs. QQC.TOXQQ.TO vs. VFV.TOXQQ.TO vs. HXQ.TOXQQ.TO vs. XQQU.TOXQQ.TO vs. QQQXQQ.TO vs. ZQQ.TOXQQ.TO vs. TEC.TO
Often compared with QQCC.TO:
QQCC.TO vs. QQCL.TOQQCC.TO vs. QQC.TOQQCC.TO vs. QQQIQQCC.TO vs. QQQQQCC.TO vs. NVDA.TOQQCC.TO vs. JEPQ.TOQQCC.TO vs. HXQ.TO

Return for Risk

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XQQ.TO
XQQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
XQQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO
QQCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO) and Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO). 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.

XQQ.TOQQCC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.45
2.76

-0.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.20
3.72

-0.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.50

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.03

4.32

-1.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.31

16.04

-4.73

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XQQ.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is comparable to the QQCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XQQ.TO and QQCC.TO, 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

XQQ.TOQQCC.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.45

2.76

-0.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

0.90

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.89

0.63

+0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

0.00

+0.86

Drawdowns

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XQQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -38.55%, which is greater than QQCC.TO's maximum drawdown of -36.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XQQ.TO and QQCC.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XQQ.TOQQCC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.55%

-36.70%

-1.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.76%

-8.15%

-4.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.72%

-22.24%

-0.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.55%

-22.24%

-16.31%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.55%

-36.70%

-1.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.27%

0.00%

-0.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.92%

-8.37%

+2.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.41%

2.19%

+1.22%

Volatility

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.48% compared to Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF (QQCC.TO) at 3.75%. This indicates that XQQ.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XQQ.TOQQCC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.48%

3.75%

+0.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.00%

10.03%

+1.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.82%

12.78%

+3.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.52%

17.58%

+4.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.34%

17.29%

+5.05%

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XQQ.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than QQCC.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

XQQ.TO vs. QQCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

XQQ.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, less than QQCC.TO's 10.48% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QQCC.TO
Global X NASDAQ-100 Covered Call ETF		10.48%11.27%9.89%11.85%11.04%5.15%5.84%6.31%7.90%6.01%6.73%8.89%
XQQ.TO
iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.21%0.25%0.32%0.31%0.43%0.17%0.26%0.46%0.52%0.53%0.76%0.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

XQQ.TO and QQCC.TO have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XQQ.TO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XQQ.TO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for QQCC.TO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for XQQ.TO and 0.65% for QQCC.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XQQ.TO and QQCC.TO

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