Data as of .
ACQQ vs MAGY: which paid, and which earned it?
ACQQ and MAGY both write options for income.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, ACQQ and MAGY hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in ACQQ | Only in MAGY |
|---|---|
| NDX100 35% VOLATILITY AUTOCALLABLE SWAP 100.00% | Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF 100.02% |
| First American Government Obligations Fu 0.36% | |
| MAGS 09/25/2026 71.37 C -0.38% |
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 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACQQ | MAGY | ACQQ | MAGY | ACQQ | MAGY | |
| 3 months | not published | +3.7% | not published | 6.1% | not published | −3.9 pts |
| 6 months | not published | +8.1% | not published | 12.9% | not published | −12.7 pts |
| 1 year | not published | +1.8% | not published | 26.5% | not published | −9.4 pts |
| Since launch | −2.1% | +25.6% | 0.0% | 42.0% | −0.8 pts | −37.5 pts |
| ACQQ ProShares Nasdaq-100 Autocallable Income ETF Option income on QQQ | MAGY Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF Covered call on MAGS, paying weekly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | ProShares | Roundhill |
| Strategy | option income | covered call |
| Benchmark | Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) | Magnificent Seven (MAGS) |
| Pays | not established | weekly |
| Payout rate, annualized | not published | 19.2% |
| Expense ratio | 0.72% | 0.99% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 0.0% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026) | 26.5% |
| Price change, 1 year | −2.1% | −25.3% |
| Total return, 1 year | −2.1% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026) | +1.8% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | −1.3% | +11.2% |
| Ahead or behind | −0.8 pts | −9.4 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 35 days | 513 days |
| Net assets | $23m | $102m |
ACQQ in plain words
Over the period since launch on Aug 14, 2026 to Sep 18, 2026, ACQQ paid 0.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 2.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −2.1%. Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) returned −1.3% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 0.8 pts.
MAGY in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, MAGY paid 26.5% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 25.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +1.8%. Magnificent Seven (MAGS) returned +11.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 9.4 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 19.2%, paid weekly.
Questions people ask
- Which is cheaper, ACQQ or MAGY?
- ACQQ charges 0.72% a year and MAGY charges 0.99%, so ACQQ 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, ACQQ against MAGY, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/acqq-vs-magy Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.