Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

ACSP vs QQQI: which paid, and which earned it?

ACSP and QQQI both write options for income.

ProShares S&P 500 Autocallable Income ETF and NEOS Nasdaq-100(R) High Income ETF.

0.0%ACSP cash paid, 1 year
15.2%QQQI cash paid, 1 year
−3.8%ACSP total return, 1 year
+16.4%QQQI total return, 1 year
ACSP2.1 pts behind SPY · since launch to Sep 18, 2026
SPY−1.6%ACSP−3.8%2.1 pts behind SPYTotal return, distributions reinvestedSPY−1.6%ACSP−3.8%2.1 pts behind SPY
QQQI5.3 pts behind QQQ · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
QQQ+21.8%QQQI+16.4%15.2% of it arrived as cash5.3 pts behind QQQTotal return, distributions reinvestedQQQ+21.8%QQQI+16.4%15.2% cash5.3 pts behind QQQ

What they hold in common

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

Only in each
Only in ACSPOnly in QQQI
S&P500 FUTURES 35% AUTOCALL SWAP BANK OF AMERICA NA 100.00%NVIDIA Corp 8.58%
Apple Inc 7.79%
Microsoft Corp 5.84%
Micron Technology Inc 5.03%
Amazon.com Inc 4.36%
Advanced Micro Devices Inc 4.02%
Alphabet Inc 3.24%
Meta Platforms Inc 3.14%

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 and Sep 21, 2026.

Performance, window by window

ACSP and QQQI over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
ACSPQQQIACSPQQQIACSPQQQI
3 monthsnot published−0.7%not published3.4%not published+1.8 pts
6 monthsnot published+16.7%not published7.7%not published−7.5 pts
1 yearnot published+16.4%not published15.2%not published−5.3 pts
Since launch−3.8%+59.6%0.0%39.9%−2.1 pts−12.3 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
ACSP and QQQI on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACSP
ProShares S&P 500 Autocallable Income ETF
Option income on SPY
QQQI
NEOS Nasdaq-100(R) High Income ETF
Option income on QQQ, paying monthly
IssuerProSharesNEOS
Strategyoption incomeoption income
BenchmarkS&P 500 (SPY)Nasdaq-100 (QQQ)
Paysnot establishedmonthly
Payout rate, annualizednot published14.0%
Expense ratio0.72%0.68%
Cash paid, 1 year0.0% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026)15.2%
Price change, 1 year−3.8%−0.1%
Total return, 1 year−3.8% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026)+16.4%
Benchmark return, 1 year−1.6%+21.8%
Ahead or behind−2.1 pts−5.3 pts
Return of capital, latest estimatenot published98%
Age35 days962 days
Net assets$27m$14.8bn

ACSP in plain words

Over the period since launch on Aug 14, 2026 to Sep 18, 2026, ACSP paid 0.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 3.8%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −3.8%. S&P 500 (SPY) returned −1.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 2.1 pts.

QQQI in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, QQQI paid 15.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 0.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +16.4%. Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) returned +21.8% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 5.3 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 14.0%, paid monthly. NEOS estimates that 98% of the distribution paid Jun 18, 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, ACSP or QQQI?
ACSP charges 0.72% a year and QQQI charges 0.68%, so QQQI 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.

ACSP against QQQI, 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, ACSP against QQQI, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/acsp-vs-qqqi Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources