Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

ACKY vs OMAH: which paid, and which earned it?

Over the year OMAH paid 14.4% of its price in cash against ACKY’s 13.9%, and returned more with it reinvested.

VistaShares Target 15 ACKtivist Distribution ETF and VistaShares Target 15 Berkshire Select Income ETF.

13.9%ACKY cash paid, 1 year
14.4%OMAH cash paid, 1 year
−1.3%ACKY total return, 1 year
+8.8%OMAH total return, 1 year

ETFIQ Return Stability Score: OMAH scores higher

Was the payout funded by returns, or by your own capital?

ACKY 12.7OMAH 65.23.8, the lowest in this set96.8, the highest

A percentile among the 173 income ETFs writing on an index or proxy. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All income ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed

ACKY17.9 pts behind SPY · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
SPY+16.6%ACKY−1.3%17.9 pts behind SPYTotal return, distributions reinvestedSPY+16.6%ACKY−1.3%17.9 pts behind SPY
OMAH4.9 pts ahead of BRK-B · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
BRK-B+3.9%OMAH+8.8%14.4% of it arrived as cash4.9 pts ahead of BRK-BTotal return, distributions reinvestedBRK-B+3.9%OMAH+8.8%4.9 pts ahead of BRK-B

What they hold in common

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

Only in each
Only in ACKYOnly in OMAH
Microsoft Corp 11.56%Apple Inc 10.59%
Brookfield Corp 11.16%Berkshire Hathaway Inc 10.22%
Uber Technologies Inc 10.74%American Express Co 6.57%
Pershing Square USA Ltd 10.50%Coca-Cola Co/The 4.94%
Meta Platforms Inc 10.23%VeriSign Inc 4.90%
Amazon.com Inc 9.95%Kroger Co/The 4.79%
Howard Hughes Holdings Inc 8.86%Chevron Corp 4.75%
Restaurant Brands International Inc 8.22%DAVITA INC 4.75%

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 dated Sep 21, 2026.

Performance, window by window

ACKY and OMAH over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
ACKYOMAHACKYOMAHACKYOMAH
3 months+0.8%+1.7%3.7%3.7%−1.5 pts−2.4 pts
6 months+5.8%+8.8%7.7%7.7%−12.2 pts+2.8 pts
1 year−1.3%+8.8%13.9%14.4%−17.9 pts+4.9 pts
Since launch−0.4%+14.6%14.0%21.4%−19.1 pts+12.4 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
ACKY and OMAH on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACKY
VistaShares Target 15 ACKtivist Distribution ETF
Covered call on SPY, paying monthly
OMAH
VistaShares Target 15 Berkshire Select Income ETF
Covered call on BRK-B, paying monthly
IssuerVistaSharesVistaShares
Strategycovered callcovered call
BenchmarkS&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxyBerkshire Hathaway B (BRK-B), used as the proxy
Paysmonthlymonthly
Payout rate, annualized15.7%15.1%
Expense ratio0.95%0.98%
Cash paid, 1 year13.9%14.4%
Price change, 1 year−15.1%−6.3%
Total return, 1 year−1.3%+8.8%
Benchmark return, 1 year+16.6%+3.9%
Ahead or behind−17.9 pts+4.9 pts
Return of capital, latest estimatenot publishednot published
Age374 days562 days
Net assets$45m$1.1bn

ACKY in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, ACKY paid 13.9% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 15.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −1.3%. S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy returned +16.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 17.9 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 15.7%, paid monthly.

OMAH in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, OMAH paid 14.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 6.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +8.8%. Berkshire Hathaway B (BRK-B), used as the proxy returned +3.9% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 4.9 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 15.1%, paid monthly.

Questions people ask

Which paid more, ACKY or OMAH?
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, ACKY paid 13.9% of its starting price in cash and OMAH paid 14.4%, so OMAH paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
Which returned more once distributions are counted, ACKY or OMAH?
With every distribution reinvested, ACKY returned −1.3% and OMAH returned +8.8% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so OMAH returned more.
Which is cheaper, ACKY or OMAH?
ACKY charges 0.95% a year and OMAH charges 0.98%, so ACKY 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.

ACKY against OMAH, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 18, 2026. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, ACKY against OMAH, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/acky-vs-omah Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources