Data as of .
ACRT vs RDTY: which paid, and which earned it?
ACRT and RDTY both write options for income.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, ACRT and RDTY hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in ACRT | Only in RDTY |
|---|---|
| RU2K LADDERED AUTOCALL SWAP BANK OF AMERICA NA 100.00% | TREASURY BILL 100.00% |
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 dated Apr 30, 2026 and Sep 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACRT | RDTY | ACRT | RDTY | ACRT | RDTY | |
| 3 months | not published | +0.8% | not published | 8.8% | not published | +4.4 pts |
| 6 months | not published | +19.6% | not published | 19.5% | not published | +1.7 pts |
| 1 year | not published | +15.7% | not published | 34.2% | not published | −1.5 pts |
| Since launch | −6.7% | +30.1% | 0.0% | 49.9% | −0.1 pts | −10.8 pts |
| ACRT ProShares Russell 2000 Autocallable Income ETF Option income on IWM | RDTY YieldMax(R) R2000 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF 0DTE covered call on IWM, paying weekly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | ProShares | YieldMax |
| Strategy | option income | 0DTE covered call |
| Benchmark | Russell 2000 (IWM) | Russell 2000 (IWM) |
| Pays | not established | weekly |
| Payout rate, annualized | not published | 29.1% |
| Expense ratio | 0.72% | 1.73% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 0.0% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026) | 34.2% |
| Price change, 1 year | −6.7% | −21.8% |
| Total return, 1 year | −6.7% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026) | +15.7% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | −6.6% | +17.2% |
| Ahead or behind | −0.1 pts | −1.5 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | 70% |
| Age | 35 days | 561 days |
| Net assets | $2m | $19m |
ACRT in plain words
Over the period since launch on Aug 14, 2026 to Sep 18, 2026, ACRT paid 0.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 6.7%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −6.7%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned −6.6% over the same days, so a holder was about even.
RDTY in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, RDTY paid 34.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 21.8%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +15.7%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned +17.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 1.5 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 29.1%, paid weekly. YieldMax estimates that 70% of the distribution paid Sep 17, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).
Questions people ask
- Which is cheaper, ACRT or RDTY?
- ACRT charges 0.72% a year and RDTY charges 1.73%, so ACRT 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, ACRT against RDTY, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/acrt-vs-rdty Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.