ACRT vs SCA: which paid, and which earned it?

ACRT and SCA both write options for income. ProShares Russell 2000 Autocallable Income ETF and GraniteShares Autocallable SMCI ETF.

0.0%
ACRT cash paid, since launch
12.8%
SCA cash paid, since launch
−8.7%
ACRT total return, since launch
+17.8%
SCA total return, since launch
ACRT · since launch to Sep 30, 2026About even with IWM
ACRT
−8.7%
IWM
−8.7%

About even with IWM

ACRT since launch: paid 0.0%, price −8.7%, total −8.7%, IWM −8.7%, 0.0 pts.

IWM

−8.7%

ACRT

−8.7%

about even with IWM

Total return, distributions reinvested

About even with IWM

ACRT since launch: paid 0.0%, price −8.7%, total −8.7%, IWM −8.7%, 0.0 pts.

IWM

−8.7%

ACRT

−8.7%

about even with IWM

0.0% of it arrived as cash. Total return, distributions reinvested. ACRT since launch: paid 0.0%, price −8.7%, total −8.7%, IWM −8.7%, 0.0 pts.

SCA · since launch to Sep 30, 202610.3 pts ahead of SMCI
SCA
+17.8%
SMCI
+7.5%

10.3 pts ahead of SMCI

SCA since launch: paid 12.8%, price +2.9%, total +17.8%, SMCI +7.5%, +10.3 pts.

SMCI

+7.5%

SCA

+17.8%

12.8% of it arrived as cash

10.3 pts ahead of SMCI

Total return, distributions reinvested

10.3 pts ahead of SMCI

SCA since launch: paid 12.8%, price +2.9%, total +17.8%, SMCI +7.5%, +10.3 pts.

SMCI

+7.5%

SCA

+17.8%

10.3 pts ahead of SMCI

12.8% of it arrived as cash. Both charts share one scale, 0 to +17.8%. SCA since launch: paid 12.8%, price +2.9%, total +17.8%, SMCI +7.5%, +10.3 pts.

Performance, window by window

Total returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
WindowACRTSCAACRTSCAACRTSCA
3 monthsnot published+38.2%not published8.0%not published−10.4 pts
Since launch
ACRT Aug 2026 · SCA May 2026
−8.7%+17.8%0.0%12.8%0.0 pts+10.3 pts

ACRT and SCA over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →

On the same fields

ACRT
ProShares Russell 2000 Autocallable Income ETF · Autocallable on IWM
SCA
GraniteShares Autocallable SMCI ETF · Autocallable on SMCI, paying monthly
Issuer ProShares GraniteShares
Strategy autocallable autocallable
Benchmark Russell 2000 (IWM) Super Micro (SMCI)
Pays not established monthly
Payout rate, annualized not published 36.6%
Expense ratio 0.72% 1.07%
Cash paid, 1 year 0.0% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026) 12.8% (since launch on May 27, 2026)
Price change, 1 year −8.7% +2.9%
Total return, 1 year −8.7% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026) +17.8% (since launch on May 27, 2026)
Benchmark return, 1 year −8.7% +7.5%
Ahead or behind 0.0 pts +10.3 pts
Return of capital, latest estimate not published 29%
Age 47 days 126 days
Net assets $1m $2m

ACRT and SCA on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

ACRT in plain words

Over the period since launch on Aug 14, 2026 to Sep 30, 2026, ACRT paid 0.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 8.7%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −8.7%. Russell 2000 (IWM) returned −8.7% over the same days, so a holder was about even.

SCA in plain words

Over the period since launch on May 27, 2026 to Sep 30, 2026, SCA paid 12.8% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 2.9%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +17.8%. Super Micro (SMCI) returned +7.5% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 10.3 pts. At its price on Sep 30, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 36.6%, paid monthly. GraniteShares estimates that 29% of the distribution paid Sep 11, 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 SCA?
ACRT charges 0.72% a year and SCA charges 1.07%, so ACRT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Cite this page

ETFIQ, ACRT against SCA, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/acrt-vs-sca

Open data

Free to use with attribution. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology.