Which paid more, QYLD or RYLD?

Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, QYLD paid 12.7% of its starting price in cash and RYLD paid 12.4%, so QYLD paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.

Which returned more once distributions are counted, QYLD or RYLD?

With every distribution reinvested, QYLD returned +23.5% and RYLD returned +21.0% over the year to Sep 4, 2026, so QYLD returned more.

Which is cheaper, QYLD or RYLD?

QYLD charges 0.60% a year and RYLD charges 0.60%, so QYLD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Data as of Sep 4, 2026. Every figure is the income desk's own, on published data.

QYLD vs RYLD

Name: ETFIQ comparison of QYLD and RYLD
Creator: ETFIQ

Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF, side by side on the income desk.

Open the live comparison on ETFIQ

QYLD and RYLD on the income desk fields, as of Sep 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF
Issuer	Global X	Global X
Strategy	covered call	covered call
Benchmark	Nasdaq-100 (QQQ)	Russell 2000 (IWM)
Pays	monthly	monthly
Payout rate, annualised	11.9%	12.2%
Expense ratio	0.60%	0.60%
Cash paid, 1 year	12.7%	12.4%
Price change, 1 year	+9.5%	+7.3%
Total return, 1 year	+23.5%	+21.0%
Benchmark return, 1 year	+25.6%	+26.4%
Ahead or behind	−2.1 pts	−5.4 pts
Return of capital, latest estimate	100%	100%
Age	4649 days	2692 days

QYLD in plain words

Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, QYLD paid 12.7% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 9.5%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +23.5%. Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) returned +25.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 2.1 pts. At its price on Sep 4, 2026 the latest distribution annualises to 11.9%, paid monthly. Global X estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Aug 27, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterisation rather than a measure of erosion).

RYLD in plain words

Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, RYLD paid 12.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 7.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +21.0%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +26.4% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 5.4 pts. At its price on Sep 4, 2026 the latest distribution annualises to 12.2%, paid monthly. Global X estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Aug 27, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterisation rather than a measure of erosion).

Questions people ask

Which paid more, QYLD or RYLD?: Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, QYLD paid 12.7% of its starting price in cash and RYLD paid 12.4%, so QYLD paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
Which returned more once distributions are counted, QYLD or RYLD?: With every distribution reinvested, QYLD returned +23.5% and RYLD returned +21.0% over the year to Sep 4, 2026, so QYLD returned more.
Which is cheaper, QYLD or RYLD?: QYLD charges 0.60% a year and RYLD charges 0.60%, so QYLD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

Cite this page. ETFIQ, QYLD against RYLD, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/QYLD-RYLD.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

ETFIQ is an independent publisher of exchange-traded fund data. It is not a fund issuer, broker-dealer or investment adviser, and it makes no recommendations; every figure here is stated arithmetic on published data. Standards and sources