Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

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

ACSP and SCLZ both write options for income.

ProShares S&P 500 Autocallable Income ETF and Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF.

0.0%ACSP cash paid, 1 year
8.4%SCLZ cash paid, 1 year
−3.8%ACSP total return, 1 year
+13.2%SCLZ 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
SCLZ14 pts behind SCHD · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
SCHD+27.2%SCLZ+13.2%8.4% as cash14 pts behind SCHDTotal return, distributions reinvestedSCHD+27.2%SCLZ+13.2%14 pts behind SCHD

What they hold in common

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

Only in each
Only in ACSPOnly in SCLZ
S&P500 FUTURES 35% AUTOCALL SWAP BANK OF 100.00%MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC 7.89%
APPLE INC 6.15%
NVIDIA CORP 5.99%
ALPHABET INC 5.18%
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC 5.14%
BROADCOM INC 4.71%
ELI LILLY & COMPANY 3.86%
AMAZON.COM INC 3.75%

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 Jun 30, 2026 and Sep 18, 2026.

Performance, window by window

ACSP and SCLZ over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
ACSPSCLZACSPSCLZACSPSCLZ
3 monthsnot published+2.9%not published2.1%not published−3.6 pts
6 monthsnot published+14.2%not published3.8%not published+1.6 pts
1 yearnot published+13.2%not published8.4%not published−14.0 pts
Since launch−3.8%+36.5%0.0%19.6%−2.1 pts−6.3 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
ACSP and SCLZ on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACSP
ProShares S&P 500 Autocallable Income ETF
Option income on SPY
SCLZ
Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
Dividend stocks with call overlay on SCHD, paying monthly
IssuerProSharesSwan
Strategyoption incomedividend stocks with call overlay
BenchmarkS&P 500 (SPY)US dividend stocks (SCHD), used as the dividend proxy
Paysnot establishedmonthly
Payout rate, annualizednot published8.5%
Expense ratio0.72%0.79%
Cash paid, 1 year0.0% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026)8.4%
Price change, 1 year−3.8%+4.1%
Total return, 1 year−3.8% (since launch on Aug 14, 2026)+13.2%
Benchmark return, 1 year−1.6%+27.2%
Ahead or behind−2.1 pts−14.0 pts
Return of capital, latest estimatenot publishednot published
Age35 days934 days
Net assets$27m$20m

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.

SCLZ in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, SCLZ paid 8.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 4.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +13.2%. US dividend stocks (SCHD), used as the dividend proxy returned +27.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 14.0 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 8.5%, paid monthly.

Questions people ask

Which is cheaper, ACSP or SCLZ?
ACSP charges 0.72% a year and SCLZ charges 0.79%, so ACSP 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 SCLZ, 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 SCLZ, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/acsp-vs-sclz Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources