I have no experience with Yongnuo, but for comparison's sake, I bought four 600EX-RTs about a month ago, and loaded them up with Eneloop batteries. I used them lightly a couple of times, and put them away with the batteries still inside.
After reading your post, I pulled the batteries and tested them just now, and the batteries still peg my little battery meter as "Full". This is after a few pops, and a month of sitting. This is what I expected, since the 580EXII's performed the same way.
I was sorely tempted by the price of the Yongnuo 600EX-RT. Thankfully, they were out of stock when I had finally made the decision to move to the 600EX-RT system. So I purchased the Canon branded 600EX-RT. Perhaps this falls under the "you get what you pay for category."
At least with Canon, if something goes wrong, one can send it to Canon, or return it to their local dealer, and not fool around with eBay or Chinese harbor freight. And maybe part of the higher cost of the Canon brand is the vetting, testing, layers of engineering approval, and manufacturing quality procedures that are not necessarily seen on the outside, but might be evidenced by issues like this, and the issues reported about the YN568 also.
Maybe it is worth just getting your money back for the YN600's if you still can, and applying the funds toward used Canon 580EXIIs and the YN622 trigger system instead? Or just get the real deal and be done with it?
On edit, there are even issues and updates of the YN622 triggering system, that I just read about for the first time here: https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php?t=1413243, where some YN622 have much shorter range than others.
I've never read about Canon having to update a printed circuit board on a flash model they have already released. But it appears that Yongnuo undergoes several midcycle production updates, and the cost of the product ticks up with each change. Perhaps that is the price to be paid for trying to find the cheapest way to produce a product... it doesn't always work the first or second time around. But it gets closer to the standard it seeks to copy with each attempt.