XYLG vs. AMDW

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

XYLG (Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF) and AMDW (Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. XYLG is passively managed, while AMDW is actively managed. Over the past year, XYLG returned 21.27% vs 214.50% for AMDW. Their 0.55 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XYLG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for AMDW.

Performance

XYLG vs. AMDW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF (XYLG) 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, XYLG achieves a 10.03% return, which is significantly lower than AMDW's 150.89% return.

XYLG

• 1D: 0.94%
• 1M: 1.94%
• 6M: 8.16%
• YTD: 10.03%
• 1Y: 21.27%
• 3Y*: 16.39%
• 5Y*: 10.43%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.56%

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
XYLG Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF	$324.88K	$371.22K	$506.01K

XYLG vs. AMDW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XYLG Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF	10.03%	8.86%
AMDW Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF	150.89%	36.56%

Correlation

The correlation between XYLG and AMDW is 0.55, 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.	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2025	0.55

The correlation between XYLG and AMDW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

XYLG vs. AMDW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XYLG	AMDW
Technology	38.3%	19.3%
Financial Services	12.3%	-
Communication Services	9.3%	-
Healthcare	9.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	-
Industrials	7.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	-
Energy	3.4%	-
Utilities	2.7%	-
Real Estate	2.0%	-
Basic Materials	1.9%	-

Return for Risk

XYLG vs. AMDW — Risk / Return Rank

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

XYLG

XYLG Risk / Return Rank: 86
XYLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
XYLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
XYLG Omega Ratio Rank: 86
XYLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
XYLG Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

XYLG vs. AMDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF (XYLG) 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.

	XYLG	AMDW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	2.52	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.96	3.02	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.37	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	6.23	-3.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.87	12.22	+2.65

XYLG vs. AMDW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XYLG Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the AMDW Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XYLG 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

XYLG vs. AMDW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XYLG drawdown since its inception was -21.30%, smaller than the maximum AMDW drawdown of -34.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XYLG and AMDW.

Drawdown Indicators

	XYLG	AMDW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.30%	-34.64%	+13.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.93%	-34.64%	+27.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.30%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-20.07%	+20.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.01%	-13.99%	+9.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.43%	17.63%	-16.20%

Volatility

XYLG vs. AMDW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF (XYLG) is 2.83%, while Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF (AMDW) has a volatility of 28.57%. This indicates that XYLG 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

	XYLG	AMDW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.83%	28.57%	-25.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.31%	66.95%	-58.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.18%	85.77%	-75.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.06%	84.89%	-70.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.79%	84.89%	-71.10%

XYLG vs. AMDW - Expense Ratio Comparison

XYLG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than AMDW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

XYLG vs. AMDW - Dividend Comparison

XYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.98%, less than AMDW's 55.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
AMDW Roundhill AMD WeeklyPay ETF	55.51%	34.78%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XYLG Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF	12.98%	13.94%	23.65%	4.90%	6.43%	7.40%	1.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XYLG and AMDW in my portfolio?

XYLG and AMDW have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XYLG or AMDW?

AMDW has higher volatility (28.57%) compared to XYLG (2.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XYLG dropped -21.30% vs AMDW's -34.64%.

Which ETF is better, XYLG or AMDW?

On 1-year performance, AMDW leads with 214.50% vs 21.27% for XYLG. On fees, XYLG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XYLG has been the lower-risk option at 2.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XYLG or AMDW?

Over the 1-year period, AMDW has performed better with a 214.50% return vs 21.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XYLG or AMDW?

XYLG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AMDW.

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

AMDW has the higher dividend yield at 55.51%, compared with 12.98% for XYLG.

What is the main difference between XYLG and AMDW?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XYLG and 0.99% for AMDW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AMDW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.10), 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.