what is the difference between the QYLD global x nasdaq 100 covered call etf and the ishares core msci world etf

The deep research logic is organized as follows: 

Okay, let's tackle this question about the differences between QYLD and IXUS. The user wants to know how these two ETFs compare. First, I need to gather all the relevant data from the provided references.

Starting with the basics, QYLD is the Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF, and IXUS is the iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF. From the references, I see that both are passive ETFs but track different indices. QYLD follows the Cboe NASDAQ-100 BuyWrite V2 Index, which is a covered call strategy on the NASDAQ 100. IXUS tracks the MSCI ACWI ex USA IMI Index, which is a broad international index excluding the US.

Looking at the expense ratios, QYLD has a higher fee at 0.6% compared to IXUS's 0.07%. That's a significant difference. The user might be concerned about costs, so highlighting this is important. Also, the leverage ratio for both is 1, meaning no leverage, so that's not a differentiator here.

Next, the management style is passive for both, but QYLD's strategy involves selling covered calls, which can affect returns and volatility. The covered call strategy is meant to generate income but might cap upside potential. The user's profile mentions interest in the NASDAQ Composite, so QYLD's focus on the NASDAQ 100 could align with that, but IXUS offers international diversification.

Assets under management are another point. QYLD has $8.32 billion, while IXUS has $47.02 billion. This might indicate liquidity differences, but both are sizable. The user might prefer the larger AUM for stability, but QYLD's niche strategy could offer specific benefits.

Dividend frequency is monthly for QYLD and semi-annually for IXUS. The user might prefer consistent monthly income, which QYLD provides, but the dividend yield is much higher for QYLD (13.27%) compared to IXUS's 2.98%. However, the high yield in QYLD could be due to the covered call strategy and might not be sustainable long-term.

Looking at the holdings, QYLD is concentrated in the NASDAQ 100, with top holdings like NVDA. IXUS has a broader international exposure, including regions like Asia and Europe. The user's interest in the NASDAQ Composite suggests they might prefer QYLD's focus, but IXUS offers diversification outside the US.

Performance-wise, the references mention that QYLD has had mixed results compared to its benchmark. The covered call strategy can underperform in bull markets but provide downside protection. The user's moderate to long-term horizon might benefit from QYLD's income generation, but they should be aware of potential capped upside.

Risk metrics like Sharpe ratio and volatility aren't directly provided, but from the comparison tools, QYLD has a higher Sharpe ratio than some peers, indicating better risk-adjusted returns. However, the covered call strategy introduces different risks, such as option premium dependency and potential underperformance in high-volatility markets.

The user's profile mentions a preference for technical analysis and news-driven approaches. QYLD's strategy might align with a more active income-generating approach, while IXUS is a more passive, broad-market play. The user's single click on the NASDAQ index suggests they might be looking for sector-specific exposure, which QYLD provides, whereas IXUS offers global diversification.

In summary, the key differences are in their strategies (covered call vs. passive international), expense ratios, dividend frequency, geographic exposure, and risk profiles. The user needs to decide whether they want the income and NASDAQ focus of QYLD or the broad international diversification and lower costs of IXUS.

### **Conclusion** 🎯
The **Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD)** and the **iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF (IXUS)** differ fundamentally in their **strategies**, **exposure**, **risk profiles**, and **cost structures**. QYLD focuses on **income generation** through a **covered call strategy** on the NASDAQ 100, while IXUS provides **broad international diversification** across global markets. Below is a detailed comparison to help you decide which aligns better with your investment goals.

---

### **Key Differences** 📊

| **Aspect** | **QYLD (NASDAQ 100 Covered Call)** | **IXUS (MSCI Total International)** |
|---------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| **Strategy** | Covered call strategy: Buys NASDAQ 100 stocks and sells call options to generate income . | Passive replication of MSCI ACWI ex USA IMI Index (global equities excluding the U.S.) . |
| **Expense Ratio** | **0.6%** (higher due to active options trading) . | **0.07%** (ultra-low for broad market exposure) . |
| **Dividend Frequency** | **Monthly** (high yield: 13.27% TTM as of 2025-08-08) . | **Semi-annual** (lower yield: 2.98% TTM as of 2025-08-08) . |
| **Geographic Exposure** | **U.S.-centric**: Tracks NASDAQ 100 (tech-heavy, e.g., NVDA, AAPL) . | **Global**: Covers 23 countries, excluding the U.S. (e.g., TSMC, ASML) . |
| **Risk Profile** | **High volatility** with capped upside potential due to sold call options . | **Moderate volatility** with broad diversification across sectors and regions . |
| **AUM** | **$8.32 billion** (smaller, niche strategy) . | **$47.02 billion** (larger, mainstream index fund) . |

---

### **Why Choose QYLD?** 🚀
- **Income Seekers**: QYLD’s **monthly dividends** (13.27% TTM) make it ideal for those prioritizing cash flow .
- **Tech Exposure**: Focuses on the **NASDAQ 100**, which includes high-growth names like NVIDIA (10.26% weight) .
- **Hedging Potential**: Covered call strategy can reduce downside risk in volatile markets .

---

### **Why Choose IXUS?** 🌍
- **Diversification**: Offers **global exposure** (23 countries, 100% ex-U.S.) with a focus on developed markets .
- **Cost Efficiency**: Ultra-low expense ratio (0.07%) for broad market access .
- **Stability**: Less volatile than QYLD, with a focus on **long-term growth** .

---

### **Final Takeaway** 🎯
- **Choose QYLD** if you want **high income**, **tech exposure**, and **hedging** against market volatility.
- **Choose IXUS** if you prefer **global diversification**, **low costs**, and **long-term growth**.

|code|Ticker|Name|Expense Ratio|market_code|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|QYLD|QYLD.O|Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF|0.6|185|
|IXUS|IXUS.O|iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF|0.07|185|

|code|Ticker|Name|Leverage Ratio|market_code|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|QYLD|QYLD.O|Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF|1|185|
|IXUS|IXUS.O|iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF|1|185|

|code|Ticker|Name|Dividend Frequency|market_code|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|QYLD|QYLD.O|Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF|Monthly|185|
|IXUS|IXUS.O|iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF|Semi-Annually|185|