QYLD vs XLV: Complete Comparison
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF vs Health Care Select Sector SPDR Fund โ overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis
Visual Overlap
Price Performance
Historical price comparison over 3M
๐Performance Comparison
โ ๏ธRisk Metrics
Interpretation:
- ๐ Lower volatility = smoother ride
- โก Higher Sharpe/Sortino = better risk-adjusted returns
- โ ๏ธ Smaller max drawdown = less worst-case pain
- ๐ Beta > 1 = more volatile than S&P 500
โ๏ธHead-to-Head Comparison
๐ XLV wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: XLV wins with better expense ratio and 5-year return. Consider XLV for your portfolio, but QYLD is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
9 shared holdings representing 4.4% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | QYLD Weight | XLV Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ISRG ISRG | 1.11% | 3.67% | 1.11% |
| 2 | AMGN AMGN | 0.94% | 3.10% | 0.94% |
| 3 | GILD GILD | 0.82% | 2.72% | 0.82% |
| 4 | VRTX VRTX | 0.62% | 2.06% | 0.62% |
| 5 | REGN REGN | 0.40% | 1.29% | 0.40% |
| 6 | IDXX IDXX | 0.31% | 1.03% | 0.31% |
| 7 | GEHC GEHC | 0.21% | 0.70% | 0.21% |
| 8 | DXCM DXCM | 0.14% | 0.48% | 0.14% |
| 9 | BIIB BIIB | 0.14% | 0.47% | 0.14% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in QYLD
Unique to QYLD
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NVDA | NVDA | 10.11% |
| AAPL | AAPL | 9.26% |
| MSFT | MSFT | 8.23% |
| AVGO | AVGO | 7.11% |
| AMZN | AMZN | 5.47% |
Top Holdings Only in XLV
Unique to XLV
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| LLY | LLY | 14.33% |
| JNJ | JNJ | 8.84% |
| ABBV | ABBV | 7.23% |
| UNH | UNH | 5.38% |
| MRK | MRK | 4.44% |
Price Correlation
How We Calculate Overlap
We use the minimum weight method with normalization to calculate portfolio overlap:
Overlap = ฮฃ min(weightA, weightB) for each shared holdingNormalization: Holdings weights are normalized to sum to 100% before comparison. This ensures accurate overlap calculations even when analyzing partial holdings data (e.g., top 50 positions).
Conservative approach: We consider only the smaller allocation for each shared position, giving you a realistic view of true portfolio overlap.
๐ This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.