YBTC vs. LFGY

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

YBTC (Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF) and LFGY (YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - YBTC is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Roundhill, while LFGY is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, YBTC returned -40.21% vs -0.86% for LFGY. Their 0.69 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. YBTC charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.02%/yr for LFGY.

Performance

YBTC vs. LFGY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF (YBTC) and YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF (LFGY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, YBTC achieves a -23.96% return, which is significantly lower than LFGY's 6.34% return.

YBTC

• 1D: -3.00%
• 1M: 3.48%
• 6M: -20.57%
• YTD: -23.96%
• 1Y: -40.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.99%

LFGY

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: -1.38%
• 6M: 5.38%
• YTD: 6.34%
• 1Y: -0.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -2.36%

*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)
LFGY YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF	$957.02K	$905.59K	$1.33M
YBTC Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF	$1.21M	$1.11M	$1.55M

YBTC vs. LFGY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
YBTC Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF	-23.96%	-4.64%
LFGY YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF	6.34%	-9.35%

Correlation

The correlation between YBTC and LFGY is 0.69, 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.	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 14, 2025	0.69

The correlation between YBTC and LFGY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

YBTC vs. LFGY — Risk / Return Rank

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

YBTC

YBTC Risk / Return Rank: 1
YBTC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
YBTC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
YBTC Omega Ratio Rank: 1
YBTC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
YBTC Martin Ratio Rank: 1

LFGY

LFGY Risk / Return Rank: 9
LFGY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
LFGY Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
LFGY Omega Ratio Rank: 10
LFGY Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
LFGY Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

YBTC vs. LFGY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF (YBTC) and YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF (LFGY). 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.

	YBTC	LFGY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.06	-0.15	-0.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.52	0.07	-1.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.81	1.01	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.87	-0.17	-0.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.35	-0.36	-1.00

YBTC vs. LFGY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current YBTC Sharpe Ratio is -1.06, which is lower than the LFGY Sharpe Ratio of -0.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of YBTC and LFGY, 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

YBTC vs. LFGY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum YBTC drawdown since its inception was -48.84%, which is greater than LFGY's maximum drawdown of -35.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for YBTC and LFGY.

Drawdown Indicators

	YBTC	LFGY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.84%	-35.94%	-12.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-48.84%	-35.94%	-12.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-44.47%	-18.77%	-25.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.91%	-14.12%	-0.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	31.35%	17.27%	+14.08%

Volatility

YBTC vs. LFGY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF (YBTC) is 7.65%, while YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF (LFGY) has a volatility of 14.26%. This indicates that YBTC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LFGY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	YBTC	LFGY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.65%	14.26%	-6.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.73%	33.33%	-1.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.25%	40.62%	-0.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	40.45%	42.60%	-2.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.45%	42.60%	-2.15%

YBTC vs. LFGY - Expense Ratio Comparison

YBTC has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than LFGY's 1.02% expense ratio.

Dividends

YBTC vs. LFGY - Dividend Comparison

YBTC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 80.99%, less than LFGY's 85.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
LFGY YieldMax Crypto Industry & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF	85.75%	94.90%	0.00%
YBTC Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF	80.99%	76.04%	44.53%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both YBTC and LFGY in my portfolio?

YBTC and LFGY have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, YBTC or LFGY?

LFGY has higher volatility (14.26%) compared to YBTC (7.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, YBTC dropped -48.84% vs LFGY's -35.94%.

Which ETF is better, YBTC or LFGY?

On 1-year performance, LFGY leads with -0.86% vs -40.21% for YBTC. On fees, YBTC is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, YBTC has been the lower-risk option at 7.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, YBTC or LFGY?

Over the 1-year period, LFGY has performed better with a -0.86% return vs -40.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, YBTC or LFGY?

YBTC is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for LFGY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, YBTC or LFGY?

LFGY has the higher dividend yield at 85.75%, compared with 80.99% for YBTC.

What is the main difference between YBTC and LFGY?

YBTC is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while LFGY is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for YBTC and 1.02% for LFGY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LFGY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.15 vs -1.06), 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.