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

ANV and DACL both write options for income. GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF and REX Defensive Autocallable Income ETF.

9.5%
ANV cash paid, since launch
0.6%
DACL cash paid, since launch
+13.2%
ANV total return, since launch
+0.5%
DACL total return, since launch
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.

DACL · since launch to Sep 30, 20262.2 pts ahead of SPY
DACL
+0.5%
SPY
−1.7%

2.2 pts ahead of SPY

DACL since launch: paid 0.6%, price −0.1%, total +0.5%, SPY −1.7%, +2.2 pts.

SPY

−1.7%

DACL

+0.5%

2.2 pts ahead of SPY

Total return, distributions reinvested

2.2 pts ahead of SPY

DACL since launch: paid 0.6%, price −0.1%, total +0.5%, SPY −1.7%, +2.2 pts.

SPY

−1.7%

DACL

+0.5%

2.2 pts ahead of SPY

0.6% of it arrived as cash. Both charts share one scale, 0 to +26.9%. DACL since launch: paid 0.6%, price −0.1%, total +0.5%, SPY −1.7%, +2.2 pts.

Performance, window by window

Total returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
WindowANVDACLANVDACLANVDACL
3 months+5.3%not published2.5%not published−10.4 ptsnot published
6 months+11.1%not published6.8%not published−19.2 ptsnot published
Since launch
ANV Feb 2026 · DACL Aug 2026
+13.2%+0.5%9.5%0.6%−13.8 pts+2.2 pts

ANV and DACL 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
DACL
REX Defensive Autocallable Income ETF · Autocallable on SPY
Issuer GraniteShares REX
Strategy autocallable autocallable
Benchmark NVIDIA (NVDA) S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy
Pays monthly not established
Payout rate, annualized 13.9% 6.6%
Expense ratio 1.07% 0.65%
Cash paid, 1 year 9.5% (since launch on Feb 3, 2026) 0.6% (since launch on Aug 13, 2026)
Price change, 1 year +3.0% −0.1%
Total return, 1 year +13.2% (since launch on Feb 3, 2026) +0.5% (since launch on Aug 13, 2026)
Benchmark return, 1 year +26.9% −1.7%
Ahead or behind −13.8 pts +2.2 pts
Return of capital, latest estimate 5% not published
Age 239 days 48 days
Net assets $7m $4m

ANV and DACL 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).

DACL in plain words

Over the period since launch on Aug 13, 2026 to Sep 30, 2026, DACL paid 0.6% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 0.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +0.5%. S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy returned −1.7% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 2.2 pts. At its price on Sep 30, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 6.6%, paid periodically.

Questions people ask

Which is cheaper, ANV or DACL?
ANV charges 1.07% a year and DACL charges 0.65%, so DACL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Cite this page

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

Open data

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