XYLP.L vs. PEPS
XYLP.L (Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF) and PEPS (Parametric Equity Plus ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. XYLP.L is passively managed, while PEPS is actively managed. Over the past year, XYLP.L returned 16.17% vs 30.97% for PEPS. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XYLP.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for PEPS.
Performance
XYLP.L vs. PEPS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
XYLP.L is traded in GBP, while PEPS is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the PEPS values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XYLP.L achieves a 3.81% return, which is significantly lower than PEPS's 8.81% return.
XYLP.L
- 1D
- -0.97%
- 1M
- 2.04%
- YTD
- 3.81%
- 6M
- 4.04%
- 1Y
- 16.17%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PEPS
- 1D
- -2.42%
- 1M
- 3.40%
- YTD
- 8.81%
- 6M
- 7.48%
- 1Y
- 30.97%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XYLP.L vs. PEPS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
XYLP.L Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF | 3.81% | -0.40% | 6.14% |
PEPS Parametric Equity Plus ETF | 8.81% | 11.75% | 1.75% |
Correlation
The correlation between XYLP.L and PEPS is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2024 | 0.46 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XYLP.L vs. PEPS — Risk / Return Rank
XYLP.L
PEPS
XYLP.L vs. PEPS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF (XYLP.L) and Parametric Equity Plus ETF (PEPS). 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.
| XYLP.L | PEPS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.45 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.70 | 3.82 | -0.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.01 | 14.66 | -2.65 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XYLP.L | PEPS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.21 | 2.40 | -0.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.83 | 0.80 | +0.04 |
Drawdowns
XYLP.L vs. PEPS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XYLP.L drawdown since its inception was -19.30%, smaller than the maximum PEPS drawdown of -22.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XYLP.L and PEPS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XYLP.L | PEPS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.30% | -22.84% | +3.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.39% | -8.13% | +3.74% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.09% | -2.42% | +0.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.81% | -4.32% | -0.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.35% | 2.12% | -0.77% |
Volatility
XYLP.L vs. PEPS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF (XYLP.L) is 2.43%, while Parametric Equity Plus ETF (PEPS) has a volatility of 3.69%. This indicates that XYLP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PEPS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XYLP.L | PEPS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.43% | 3.69% | -1.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.73% | 9.32% | -3.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.35% | 12.97% | -5.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.40% | 18.47% | -8.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.40% | 18.47% | -8.07% |
XYLP.L vs. PEPS - Expense Ratio Comparison
XYLP.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than PEPS's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
XYLP.L vs. PEPS - Dividend Comparison
XYLP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.79%, more than PEPS's 0.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
PEPS Parametric Equity Plus ETF | 0.91% | 1.00% | 0.17% | 0.00% |
XYLP.L Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF | 7.79% | 9.76% | 6.22% | 3.98% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XYLP.L and PEPS have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PEPS is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PEPS is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for XYLP.L.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Parametric. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for XYLP.L and 0.10% for PEPS.
Find the right allocation for XYLP.L and PEPS
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