FAAR vs TYLG
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF vs Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
TYLG has a lower expense ratio. TYLG delivered stronger 1-year returns. TYLG offers more diversification with 59 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FAAR | TYLG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.97% | 0.60% | |
| AUM | $191M | $14M | |
| Dividend Yield | 9.19% | 7.86% | |
| Holdings | 6 | 77 | |
| YTD Return | +15.59% | +22.67% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.13% | +33.77% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +9.10% | +23.72% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.35% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.1% | 15.9% | |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8% | -24.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Global X by mirae Asset | |
| Category | Commodity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 18, 2016 | Nov 21, 2022 |
FAAR vs TYLG Performance
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF (TYLG) is a ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year FAAR returned +20.13% while TYLG returned +33.77%. Year to date, FAAR is up 15.59% versus a gain of 22.67% for TYLG.
Over three years, FAAR compounded at +9.10% per year against +23.72% for TYLG. Across the full 4-year window we track, TYLG has the edge at +25.71% annualized vs +3.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TYLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.9% compared with 9.1% for FAAR. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -18.8% for FAAR and -24.5% for TYLG. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at -0.05. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FAAR charges 0.97% per year while TYLG charges 0.60%. On a $10,000 position that is $97 vs $60 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FAAR currently yields 9.19% against 7.86% for TYLG.
Holdings Overlap
FAAR and TYLG share 0 holdings out of 60 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FAAR or TYLG?
FAAR has an expense ratio of 0.97% while TYLG charges 0.60%. TYLG is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $37 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FAAR or TYLG?
Over the past year FAAR returned +20.13% vs +33.77% for TYLG, so TYLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), FAAR annualized +3.46% vs +25.71% for TYLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FAAR or TYLG?
TYLG has been the more volatile fund at 15.9% annualized versus 9.1% for FAAR. Worst drawdown: FAAR -18.8% vs TYLG -24.5%.
Should I hold both FAAR and TYLG?
FAAR and TYLG have a monthly-return correlation of -0.05, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FAAR and TYLG?
FAAR and TYLG share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 60 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FAAR or TYLG?
FAAR yields 9.19% while TYLG yields 7.86%, so FAAR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.