Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

vsOpen in the appCompare their flowsaskIQ about these two fundsAsk the committee about these two funds
Income ETFs

QDTE vs RYLD: Dividend Yield & Total Return

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, QDTE paid 34.2% of its price in cash against RYLD’s 12.1%, and returned more with it reinvested.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about QDTE and RYLD

Net assets: $919m on Oct 28, 2026 for Roundhill Nasdaq-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF, and $1.3bn on Oct 12, 2026 for Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF.

At a glance
34.2%
QDTE cash paid, 1 year
12.1%
RYLD cash paid, 1 year
+16.5%
QDTE total return, 1 year
+12.1%
RYLD total return, 1 year
QDTE · 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 1.3 pts ahead of QQQ
QDTE
+16.5%
QQQ
+15.2%

1.3 pts ahead of QQQ

QDTE over 1 year: paid 34.2%, price −21.6%, total +16.5%, QQQ +15.2%, +1.3 pts. Data to Oct 28, 2026.

QQQ

+15.2%

QDTE

+16.5%

34.2% of it arrived as cash

1.3 pts ahead of QQQ

Total return, distributions reinvested

1.3 pts ahead of QQQ

QDTE over 1 year: paid 34.2%, price −21.6%, total +16.5%, QQQ +15.2%, +1.3 pts. Data to Oct 28, 2026.

QQQ

+15.2%

QDTE

+16.5%

34.2% as cash

1.3 pts ahead of QQQ

34.2% of it arrived as cash. Total return, distributions reinvested. QDTE over 1 year: paid 34.2%, price −21.6%, total +16.5%, QQQ +15.2%, +1.3 pts. Data to Oct 28, 2026.

Data to Oct 28, 2026.
RYLD · 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 2 pts behind IWM
RYLD
+12.1%
IWM
+14.1%

2 pts behind IWM

RYLD over 1 year: paid 12.1%, price −0.6%, total +12.1%, IWM +14.1%, −2.0 pts. Data to Oct 28, 2026.

IWM

+14.1%

RYLD

+12.1%

12.1% of it arrived as cash

2 pts behind IWM

Total return, distributions reinvested

2 pts behind IWM

RYLD over 1 year: paid 12.1%, price −0.6%, total +12.1%, IWM +14.1%, −2.0 pts. Data to Oct 28, 2026.

IWM

+14.1%

RYLD

+12.1%

12.1% as cash

2 pts behind IWM

12.1% of it arrived as cash. Both charts share one scale, with zero at the line. RYLD over 1 year: paid 12.1%, price −0.6%, total +12.1%, IWM +14.1%, −2.0 pts. Data to Oct 28, 2026.

Data to Oct 28, 2026.

Pair scorecard

RYLD costs 0.36 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 4.4 points; RYLD is 1.4 times larger.

Points (pts) are percentage points.

QDTE vs RYLD: Dividend Yield & Total Return
MeasureQDTERYLD
Paid and earned
Total return, 1 year+16.5%+12.1%
Price change, 1 yearfell 21.6%fell 0.6%
Return of capital, issuer estimate100% of the Oct 23, 2026 payment100% of the Sep 24, 2026 payment
Against its benchmark
BenchmarkNasdaq-100, measured through QQQRussell 2000, measured through IWM
Against its benchmark, same daysahead by 1.3 ptsbehind by 2.0 pts
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.96%0.60%
Net assets, as of Oct 12, 2026$950m$1.3bn
Holdings
Holdings in common0%
ETFIQ Distribution Coverage Score · RYLD scores higher How much of what it paid out did its total return cover?
IQ Income Score35.1QDTE57.6RYLD

How much of its payouts the fund's total return covered, ranked against 164 income ETFs not writing on a single company. 100 is best. How it is computed

0.3, the lowest in this set 99.7, the highest

A percentile among the 164 income ETFs not writing on a single company. One year only, and a ratio of two published numbers: it says nothing about where a distribution came from. All income ETFs ranked by it →

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 28, 2026. Method

Risk and return

Mar 15, 2024 to Oct 23, 2026 · 136 weekly returns
QDTE RYLD
Return
Total return edge QDTE +60.8% +25.0%
Annualized edge QDTE +19.9% +8.9%
Price return edge RYLD −38.8% −9.3%
Risk
Volatility edge RYLD 17.8% 10.8%
Max drawdown edge RYLD −20.5% −15.3%
Downside capture 91.4% 62.8%
Beta 0.85 0.54
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe edge QDTE 0.87 0.45
Sortino edge QDTE 1.27 0.58
Treynor 0.182 0.063
Calmar edge QDTE 0.97 0.58
Against the benchmark
Alpha +1.2% a year −1.3% a year
Alpha t-stat 0.39 −0.43
Information ratio −0.23 −0.38
Tracking error 5.7% 13.9%

Each against its own benchmark: QDTE against QQQ, Mar 15, 2024 to Oct 23, 2026; RYLD against IWM, May 3, 2019 to Oct 23, 2026.

Reading

QDTE returned more: +60.8% to +25.0%. RYLD swung less: 10.8% to 17.8%. RYLD fell less at its worst: −15.3% to −20.5%.

Full scorecard

19 measures, with how each is measured
Open ↓
Risk and return: QDTE vs RYLD: Dividend Yield & Total Return
MeasureQDTERYLDEdgeHow it is measured
Return
Total return+60.8%+25.0%QDTEPrice change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized+19.9%+8.9%QDTETotal return as a yearly rate.
Price return−38.8%−9.3%RYLDPrice change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility17.8%10.8%RYLDSpread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation12.2%8.2%RYLDLike volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown−20.5%−15.3%RYLDDeepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Upside capture81.9%33.1%Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose.
Downside capture91.4%62.8%Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better.
Beta0.850.54Not an edgeHow far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves.
R squared0.930.73Not an edgeShare of its weekly moves its benchmark explains.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe0.870.45QDTEReturn above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino1.270.58QDTEReturn above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Treynor0.1820.063Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta.
Calmar0.970.58QDTEAnnualized return divided by the max drawdown.
Against the benchmark
BenchmarkQQQIWMThe ETF each fund is measured against.
Alpha+1.2% a year−1.3% a yearNot significantYearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts.
Alpha t-stat0.39−0.43Not an edgeHow sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance.
Alpha range−4.8% to +7.2%−7.0% to +4.5%Includes zeroThe 95% range for the yearly alpha.
Information ratio−0.23−0.38Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error.
Tracking error5.7%13.9%Not an edgeHow far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 136 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

0%

By the books each fund has filed, QDTE and RYLD hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 28, 2026.

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first QDTE RYLD
Only in one fund ↓
Only in QDTE
QQQ 11/19/2027 70.11 C 73.81%
QQQ 09/17/2027 70.69 C 17.75%
Only in RYLD
Global X Russell 2000 ETF 100.94%
N/A 0.00%
N/A 0.00%
N/A 0.00%
N/A 0.00%
N/A 0.00%
Check overlap with more funds →

Side by side

QDTE Roundhill Nasdaq-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF · 0DTE covered call on QQQ, paying weekly RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF · Covered call on IWM, paying monthly
Strategy 0DTE covered call covered call
Benchmark Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) Russell 2000 (IWM)
Pays weekly monthly
Payout rate, annualized 20.7% 11.5%
Expense ratio 0.96% 0.60%
Cash paid, 1 year 34.2% 12.1%
Price change, 1 year −21.6% −0.6%
Total return, 1 year +16.5% +12.1%
Benchmark return, 1 year +15.2% +14.1%
Ahead or behind +1.3 pts −2.0 pts
Return of capital, latest estimate 100% 100%
Age 2.6 years 7.5 years
Net assets, QDTE as of Oct 28, 2026 and RYLD as of Oct 12, 2026 $919m $1.3bn

As of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ. Cash paid: distributions over the window, as a share of the starting price. Payout rate: the latest payment, annualized, over today’s price.

Window by window

Window by window: QDTE vs RYLD: Dividend Yield & Total Return
Total returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
WindowQDTERYLDQDTERYLDQDTERYLD
3 months+9.5%−0.3%6.6%2.9%−0.3 pts+1.9 pts
6 months+10.2%+6.8%14.9%6.2%+0.3 pts+2.9 pts
1 year+16.5%+12.1%34.2%12.1%+1.3 pts−2.1 pts
3 years–+38.8%–35.9%–−40.5 pts
Since launchNot the same days: QDTE Mar 2024 · RYLD Apr 2019+61.4%+49.0%75.3%68.4%−3.8 pts−50.0 pts

– means no data for this window. Open this comparison in the app →

Client brief · page 1 of 2 Report BR-FC8BFDAECF

QDTE and RYLD are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?

  1. Income paid. QDTE paid 34.2% and RYLD 12.1% (cash paid over 1 year, as a share of its price at the start), a gap of 22.1 points.
  2. What each is measured against. QDTE is measured against Nasdaq-100 through QQQ and RYLD against Russell 2000 through IWM.
  3. Holdings in common. 0% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Oct 28, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026).

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Your saved page · Privacy.

Alert

QDTE flows, by email on Sundays.

One-click unsubscribe. See Privacy.

About each fund
QDTE

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, QDTE paid 34.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 21.6%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +16.5%. Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) returned +15.2% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 1.3 pts. At its price on Oct 28, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 20.7%, paid weekly. Roundhill estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Oct 23, 2026 was a return of capital (its 19a-1 notice). That is a tax label, not a measure of erosion.

RYLD

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, RYLD paid 12.1% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 0.6%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +12.1%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +14.1% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 2.0 pts. At its price on Oct 28, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 11.5%, paid monthly. Global X estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Sep 24, 2026 was a return of capital (its 19a-1 notice).

Questions people ask

Which paid more, QDTE or RYLD?
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, QDTE paid 34.2% of its starting price in cash and RYLD paid 12.1%, so QDTE paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
Which returned more once distributions are counted, QDTE or RYLD?
With every distribution reinvested, QDTE returned +16.5% and RYLD +12.1% over the year to Oct 28, 2026.
Which is cheaper, QDTE or RYLD?
QDTE charges 0.96% a year and RYLD charges 0.60%, so RYLD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Sources and dates

Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.

How this is computed

It is a place in a set, not a rating or a recommendation.

Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.

Every number is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.

Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, QDTE against RYLD, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/qdte-vs-ryld

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.