Data as of . Every figure is the income desk's own, on published data.
OARK vs RYLD
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, OARK and RYLD hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in OARK | Only in RYLD |
|---|---|
| TREASURY BILL 37.81% | Global X Russell 2000 ETF 100.00% |
| TREASURY BILL 30.32% | N/A 0.00% |
| TREASURY BILL 18.55% | N/A 0.00% |
| TREASURY BILL 10.80% | N/A 0.00% |
| TREASURY BILL 2.51% | 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
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OARK | RYLD | OARK | RYLD | OARK | RYLD | |
| 3 months | +9.3% | +7.0% | 9.7% | 3.1% | +7.2 pts | +1.7 pts |
| 6 months | +14.7% | +13.5% | 22.1% | 6.2% | −5.5 pts | −5.0 pts |
| 1 year | +13.3% | +21.0% | 39.3% | 12.4% | −12.3 pts | −5.4 pts |
| 3 years | +54.1% | +33.0% | 84.0% | 32.7% | −39.4 pts | −31.2 pts |
| Since launch | +57.2% | +54.7% | 89.0% | 67.2% | −97.4 pts | −54.1 pts |
| OARK YieldMax(R) Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF | RYLD Global X Russell 2000 Covered Call ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | YieldMax | Global X |
| Strategy | synthetic covered call | covered call |
| Benchmark | Nasdaq-100 (QQQ), used as the innovation proxy | Russell 2000 (IWM) |
| Pays | weekly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualised | 40.3% | 12.2% |
| Expense ratio | 1.00% | 0.60% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 39.3% | 12.4% |
| Price change, 1 year | −29.0% | +7.3% |
| Total return, 1 year | +13.3% | +21.0% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +25.6% | +26.4% |
| Ahead or behind | −12.3 pts | −5.4 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | 78% | 100% |
| Age | 1381 days | 2692 days |
OARK in plain words
Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, OARK paid 39.3% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 29.0%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +13.3%. Nasdaq-100 (QQQ), used as the innovation proxy returned +25.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 12.3 pts. At its price on Sep 4, 2026 the latest distribution annualises to 40.3%, paid weekly. YieldMax estimates that 78% 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, OARK or RYLD?
- Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, OARK paid 39.3% of its starting price in cash and RYLD paid 12.4%, so OARK paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, OARK or RYLD?
- With every distribution reinvested, OARK returned +13.3% and RYLD returned +21.0% over the year to Sep 4, 2026, so RYLD returned more.
- Which is cheaper, OARK or RYLD?
- OARK charges 1.00% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, OARK against RYLD, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/OARK-RYLD.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.