ETF Comparison

QYLD vs RYLD: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Data updated July 4, 2026

Global X

ETFs123

Total AUM$98.3B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

Global X is known for developing thematic and alternative investment ETFs with a strong emphasis on income-generating strategies. Their 37-fund lineup spans diverse categories including covered call funds, SuperDividend income products, digital assets, commodities, and sector-specific investments, alongside traditional bond and risk-managed income options. Notable tickers like DIV, MLPA, and BCCC reflect their specialization in high-yield and alternative income strategies, positioning them as a provider focused on investors seeking yield-oriented and thematically-driven exposure.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on QYLD and RYLD.

See all Global X ETFs

Side-by-side snapshot

	QYLD	RYLD
Full name	Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF	Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF
Issuer	Global X	Global X
Last Close	$18.09 as of July 4, 2026	$15.98 as of July 4, 2026
Distribution yield	12.30%	12.15%
Distribution Safety Score	83	72
Expense ratio	0.61%	0.60%
AUM	$8.22B	$1.36B
Distribution frequency	Monthly	Monthly
Underlying index	NASDAQ 100	Russell 2000
Objective	Covered Call	Covered Call
Asset class	Equity	Equity
Inception date	12/11/2013	04/18/2019
Beta	0.49	0.55
Last dividend	$0.1854	$0.1618
Ex-dividend date	06/22/2026	06/22/2026

Income calculator

See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — no signup required.

Build a sample portfolio Forecast income

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.

Total returns

QYLD has outpaced RYLD over the trailing twelve months, posting a 20.88% total return against 19.73%. The lead holds up over 5 years too: QYLD has compounded at 8.10% a year, against 2.48% for RYLD. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Symbol	YTD	1Y	3Y	5Y	Since Apr 2019	Volatility	Sharpe	Sortino	Max drawdown
QYLD	7.58%	20.88%	13.28%	8.10%	8.95%	13.2%	0.61	0.87	-19.1%
RYLD	8.85%	19.73%	7.86%	2.48%	5.57%	12.8%	0.24	0.34	-19.0%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date, split-adjusted, as of July 2, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; longer windows are annualized. “Since Apr 2019” measures every fund from April 22, 2019 — the youngest fund's first trading day — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.

Quick verdict

QYLD (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF) and RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) are both monthly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

QYLD offers the higher yield at 12.30% vs 12.15% for RYLD. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

RYLD is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.60% compared to 0.61%.

They track different benchmarks: QYLD is linked to NASDAQ 100 while RYLD tracks Russell 2000, which means their performance drivers differ.

QYLD is the larger fund by assets ($8.22B), which generally means tighter spreads and better liquidity.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, QYLD would generate roughly $102.50/month, while RYLD would produce $101.25/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay monthly distributions.

QYLD yield12.30%

RYLD yield12.15%

Monthly diff on $10K$1.25

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, QYLD would cost approximately $610 in fees vs $600 for RYLD (simplified, not compounded). The $10.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

QYLD ER0.61%

RYLD ER0.60%

Strategy & risk

QYLD tracks NASDAQ 100 with a covered call approach, while RYLD tracks Russell 2000 with a covered call approach. Beta is 0.49 for QYLD and 0.55 for RYLD, indicating QYLD is less volatile relative to the market.

QYLD beta0.49

RYLD beta0.55

Fund details

QYLD is managed by Global X (launched 12/11/2013) with $8.22B in assets. RYLD is managed by Global X (launched 04/18/2019) with $1.36B in assets.

QYLD AUM$8.22B

RYLD AUM$1.36B

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is QYLD or RYLD better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. QYLD currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.

What is the difference between QYLD and RYLD?

QYLD (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF) tracks NASDAQ 100 with a covered call approach, while RYLD (Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF) tracks Russell 2000 with a covered call approach. They are issued by Global X and Global X respectively.

Can I hold both QYLD and RYLD?

Yes. Many income investors hold both to diversify across different strategies and underlying indexes. This can reduce concentration risk while maintaining a strong income stream.

Which has lower fees, QYLD or RYLD?

QYLD has an expense ratio of 0.61% while RYLD charges 0.60%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in QYLD vs RYLD generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in QYLD would generate roughly $102.50 per month ($1,230.00 annually). The same in RYLD would produce about $101.25 per month ($1,215.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, QYLD or RYLD?

More comparisons to explore

People also compare QYLD with

People also compare RYLD with

Popular comparisons

QYLD vs RYLD — at a glance

Generated June 2026 from current fund data.

Overview

QYLD and RYLD are both monthly-paying covered call ETFs from Global X that sell call options against their underlying stock holdings to generate high current income. The critical difference: QYLD overlays calls on the Nasdaq 100 (large-cap growth tech-heavy index), while RYLD does the same on the Russell 2000 (small-cap value index). This single choice determines their volatility profile, sector tilt, and long-term return potential.

How they differ

The largest distinction is underlying index exposure. QYLD holds mega-cap tech and growth stocks (Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Tesla), while RYLD holds small-cap companies across all sectors. That explains the beta spread: QYLD's 0.49 beta signals it'll swing less than the broad market, while RYLD's 0.55 is still muted but reflects small-cap turbulence.

Distribution yields are nearly identical at 12.35% (QYLD) and 12.23% (RYLD)—both paid monthly. The expense ratios are virtually the same at 0.61% versus 0.60%. The meaningful gap is asset base: QYLD manages $8.22B versus RYLD's $1.36B, giving QYLD far tighter bid-ask spreads and deeper liquidity. QYLD also has a longer track record, having launched in December 2013 versus RYLD's April 2019 inception.

Both strategies cap upside by selling calls, but the magnitude of that trade-off differs. The Nasdaq 100's growth orientation means call premiums are fatter in bull markets (more upside surrendered when tech rallies). Small-cap value stocks typically generate narrower call premiums, so RYLD may sacrifice less upside during quiet periods—but also captures less when small caps run.

Who each is best for

QYLD: Fits investors with low volatility tolerance who want monthly high income from mega-cap tech exposure and are comfortable capping capital gains in exchange for consistent option premium capture.

RYLD: Fits investors seeking high current yield from small-cap exposure who can tolerate modestly higher price swings and are willing to accept limited upside in return for steady call-writing income.

Key risks to know

NAV erosion at 12%+ distribution rates. Both funds pay out yields exceeding typical underlying dividend yields plus call premium; this suggests a portion of distributions may represent return of capital, which erodes net asset value over time if the underlying indices don't appreciate.

Call cap risk diverges by index character. QYLD's Nasdaq 100 holdings are prone to large rallies in favorable tech cycles, making surrendered upside more painful; RYLD's smaller-cap universe experiences wider drawdowns but less explosive rallies, narrowing the regret potential in both directions.

Liquidity and tracking disparity. RYLD's $1.36B AUM is less than one-sixth of QYLD's, widening trading spreads and reducing the precision of daily NAV tracking, especially during market stress.

Beta compression doesn't mean downside protection. Both funds' low betas reflect call-option dampening, not fundamental defensiveness. In sharp equity selloffs, the short calls can create unexpected losses if the underlying index gaps down hard.

Bottom line

If you want the largest asset base, tightest trading liquidity, and tech-heavy index exposure with a hard cap on upside, QYLD stands out. If you prefer small-cap diversification and don't mind tighter spreads and less historical data, RYLD offers a similar yield pickup at a fraction of the asset scale. Both entail NAV decay risk at their current payout rates—neither is a substitute for understanding that high current yield often comes with principal erosion. Past performance of either index doesn't predict future call-option returns.

AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.