ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of . Every figure is the income desk's own, on published data.

MSFO vs RYLD

YieldMax(R) MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF and Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF, side by side on the income desk.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, MSFO and RYLD hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in MSFOOnly in RYLD
TREASURY BILL 32.44%Global X Russell 2000 ETF 100.00%
TREASURY BILL 31.42%N/A 0.00%
TREASURY BILL 14.95%N/A 0.00%
TREASURY BILL 12.47%N/A 0.00%
TREASURY BILL 8.72%N/A 0.00%
N/A 0.00%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings as filed for Apr 30, 2026.

Performance, window by window

MSFO and RYLD over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
MSFORYLDMSFORYLDMSFORYLD
3 months+16.0%+7.0%11.2%3.1%−4.2 pts+1.7 pts
6 months+18.9%+13.5%20.6%6.2%−3.8 pts−5.0 pts
1 year+0.3%+21.0%27.9%12.4%+1.1 pts−5.4 pts
3 years+51.3%+33.0%78.8%32.7%−2.1 pts−31.2 pts
Since launch+55.5%+54.7%81.0%67.2%−2.8 pts−54.1 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
MSFO and RYLD on the income desk fields, as of Sep 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MSFO
YieldMax(R) MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF
RYLD
Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF
IssuerYieldMaxGlobal X
Strategysynthetic covered callcovered call
BenchmarkMicrosoft (MSFT)Russell 2000 (IWM)
Paysweeklymonthly
Payout rate, annualised41.2%12.2%
Expense ratio1.03%0.60%
Cash paid, 1 year27.9%12.4%
Price change, 1 year−30.3%+7.3%
Total return, 1 year+0.3%+21.0%
Benchmark return, 1 year−0.8%+26.4%
Ahead or behind+1.1 pts−5.4 pts
Return of capital, latest estimate95%100%
Age1106 days2692 days

MSFO in plain words

Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, MSFO paid 27.9% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 30.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +0.3%. Microsoft (MSFT) returned −0.8% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 1.1 pts. At its price on Sep 4, 2026 the latest distribution annualises to 41.2%, paid weekly. YieldMax estimates that 95% of the distribution paid Sep 4, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterisation rather than a measure of erosion).

RYLD in plain words

Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, RYLD paid 12.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 7.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +21.0%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +26.4% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 5.4 pts. At its price on Sep 4, 2026 the latest distribution annualises to 12.2%, paid monthly. Global X estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Aug 27, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterisation rather than a measure of erosion).

Questions people ask

Which paid more, MSFO or RYLD?
Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, MSFO paid 27.9% of its starting price in cash and RYLD paid 12.4%, so MSFO paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
Which returned more once distributions are counted, MSFO or RYLD?
With every distribution reinvested, MSFO returned +0.3% and RYLD returned +21.0% over the year to Sep 4, 2026, so RYLD returned more.
Which is cheaper, MSFO or RYLD?
MSFO charges 1.03% a year and RYLD charges 0.60%, so RYLD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

MSFO against RYLD, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 4, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, MSFO against RYLD, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/MSFO-RYLD.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources