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.

Data as of Sep 4, 2026. Every figure is the income desk's own, on published data.

MSFO vs RYLD

Name: ETFIQ comparison of MSFO and RYLD
Creator: ETFIQ

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

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
Issuer	YieldMax	Global X
Strategy	synthetic covered call	covered call
Benchmark	Microsoft (MSFT)	Russell 2000 (IWM)
Pays	weekly	monthly
Payout rate, annualised	41.2%	12.2%
Expense ratio	1.03%	0.60%
Cash paid, 1 year	27.9%	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 estimate	95%	100%
Age	1106 days	2692 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

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.

ETFIQ is an independent publisher of exchange-traded fund data. It is not a fund issuer, broker-dealer or investment adviser, and it makes no recommendations; every figure here is stated arithmetic on published data. Standards and sources