ANV vs CAIE: which paid, and which earned it?

ANV and CAIE both write options for income. GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF and Calamos Autocallable Income ETF.

9.5%
ANV cash paid, since launch
14.0%
CAIE cash paid, 1 year
+13.2%
ANV total return, since launch
+11.8%
CAIE total return, 1 year
ANV · since launch to Sep 30, 202613.8 pts behind NVDA
ANV
+13.2%
NVDA
+26.9%

13.8 pts behind NVDA

ANV since launch: paid 9.5%, price +3.0%, total +13.2%, NVDA +26.9%, −13.8 pts.

NVDA

+26.9%

ANV

+13.2%

9.5% of it arrived as cash

13.8 pts behind NVDA

Total return, distributions reinvested

13.8 pts behind NVDA

ANV since launch: paid 9.5%, price +3.0%, total +13.2%, NVDA +26.9%, −13.8 pts.

NVDA

+26.9%

ANV

+13.2%

13.8 pts behind NVDA

9.5% of it arrived as cash. Total return, distributions reinvested. ANV since launch: paid 9.5%, price +3.0%, total +13.2%, NVDA +26.9%, −13.8 pts.

CAIE · 1 year to Sep 30, 20263.9 pts behind SPY
CAIE
+11.8%
SPY
+15.7%

3.9 pts behind SPY

CAIE over 1 year: paid 14.0%, price −3.1%, total +11.8%, SPY +15.7%, −3.9 pts.

SPY

+15.7%

CAIE

+11.8%

14.0% of it arrived as cash

3.9 pts behind SPY

Total return, distributions reinvested

3.9 pts behind SPY

CAIE over 1 year: paid 14.0%, price −3.1%, total +11.8%, SPY +15.7%, −3.9 pts.

SPY

+15.7%

CAIE

+11.8%

3.9 pts behind SPY

14.0% of it arrived as cash. Both charts share one scale, 0 to +26.9%. CAIE over 1 year: paid 14.0%, price −3.1%, total +11.8%, SPY +15.7%, −3.9 pts.

Performance, window by window

Total returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
WindowANVCAIEANVCAIEANVCAIE
3 months+5.3%+0.9%2.5%2.3%−10.4 pts−1.6 pts
6 months+11.1%+13.2%6.8%6.3%−19.2 pts−3.8 pts
1 yearnot published+11.8%not published14.0%not published−3.9 pts
Since launch
ANV Feb 2026 · CAIE Jun 2025
+13.2%+26.1%9.5%18.1%−13.8 pts−1.2 pts

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

On the same fields

ANV
GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF · Autocallable on NVDA, paying monthly
CAIE
Calamos Autocallable Income ETF · Autocallable on SPY, paying monthly
Issuer GraniteShares Calamos
Strategy autocallable autocallable
Benchmark NVIDIA (NVDA) S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy
Pays monthly monthly
Payout rate, annualized 13.9% 14.1%
Expense ratio 1.07% 0.74%
Cash paid, 1 year 9.5% (since launch on Feb 3, 2026) 14.0%
Price change, 1 year +3.0% −3.1%
Total return, 1 year +13.2% (since launch on Feb 3, 2026) +11.8%
Benchmark return, 1 year +26.9% +15.7%
Ahead or behind −13.8 pts −3.9 pts
Return of capital, latest estimate 5% not published
Age 239 days 462 days
Net assets $7m $872m

ANV and CAIE on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

ANV in plain words

Over the period since launch on Feb 3, 2026 to Sep 30, 2026, ANV paid 9.5% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 3.0%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +13.2%. NVIDIA (NVDA) returned +26.9% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 13.8 pts. At its price on Sep 30, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 13.9%, paid monthly. GraniteShares estimates that 5% 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).

CAIE in plain words

Over the year to Sep 30, 2026, CAIE paid 14.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 3.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +11.8%. S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy returned +15.7% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 3.9 pts. At its price on Sep 30, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 14.1%, paid monthly.

Questions people ask

Which is cheaper, ANV or CAIE?
ANV charges 1.07% a year and CAIE charges 0.74%, so CAIE is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Cite this page

ETFIQ, ANV against CAIE, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/anv-vs-caie

Open data

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