Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

BITA vs XBTY: which paid, and which earned it?

BITA and XBTY both write options for income.

iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF and GraniteShares YieldBOOST Bitcoin ETF.

3.7%BITA cash paid, 1 year
37.4%XBTY cash paid, 1 year
+21.0%BITA total return, 1 year
−42.9%XBTY total return, 1 year
BITA2.8 pts behind IBIT · since launch to Sep 18, 2026
IBIT+23.8%BITA+21.0%2.8 pts behind IBITTotal return, distributions reinvestedIBIT+23.8%BITA+21.0%2.8 pts behind IBIT
XBTY11.8 pts behind IBIT · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
IBIT−31.1%XBTY−42.9%11.8 pts behind IBITTotal return, distributions reinvestedIBIT−31.1%XBTY−42.9%11.8 pts behind IBIT

What they hold in common

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

Only in each
Only in BITAOnly in XBTY
BITCOIN 67.78%Treasury Bill 62.54%
ISHARES BITCOIN TRUST ETF CL1 32.88%Treasury Bill 37.46%
BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY 0.07%
SEP26 IBIT C @ 45.000000 -0.04%
OCT26 IBIT C @ 45.000000 -0.13%
OCT26 IBIT C @ 44.000000 -0.15%
SEP26 IBIT C @ 41.000000 -0.41%

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 17, 2026.

Performance, window by window

BITA and XBTY over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
BITAXBTYBITAXBTYBITAXBTY
3 months+24.6%+6.9%3.9%8.4%−4.6 pts−22.3 pts
6 monthsnot published−1.3%not published23.0%not published−17.1 pts
1 yearnot published−42.9%not published37.4%not published−11.8 pts
Since launch+21.0%−34.0%3.7%60.0%−2.8 pts−11.1 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
BITA and XBTY on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
BITA
iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF
Covered call on IBIT, paying monthly
XBTY
GraniteShares YieldBOOST Bitcoin ETF
Synthetic covered call on IBIT, paying weekly
IssueriSharesGraniteShares
Strategycovered callsynthetic covered call
BenchmarkBitcoin (IBIT)Bitcoin (IBIT)
Paysmonthlyweekly
Payout rate, annualized12.8%29.8%
Expense rationot published1.15%
Cash paid, 1 year3.7% (since launch on Jun 16, 2026)37.4%
Price change, 1 year+16.6%−74.1%
Total return, 1 year+21.0% (since launch on Jun 16, 2026)−42.9%
Benchmark return, 1 year+23.8%−31.1%
Ahead or behind−2.8 pts−11.8 pts
Return of capital, latest estimatenot published92%
Age94 days493 days
Net assets$87m$10m

BITA in plain words

Over the period since launch on Jun 16, 2026 to Sep 18, 2026, BITA paid 3.7% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 16.6%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +21.0%. Bitcoin (IBIT) returned +23.8% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 2.8 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 12.8%, paid monthly.

XBTY in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, XBTY paid 37.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 74.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −42.9%. Bitcoin (IBIT) returned −31.1% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 11.8 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 29.8%, paid weekly. GraniteShares estimates that 92% of the distribution paid Aug 25, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).

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.

BITA against XBTY, 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, BITA against XBTY, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/bita-vs-xbty Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources