Data as of .
BITY vs BTCC: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year BTCC paid 29.0% of its price in cash against BITY’s 15.1%, and returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: BTCC scores higher
Was the payout funded by returns, or by your own capital?
A percentile among the 173 income ETFs writing on an index or proxy. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All income ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, BITY and BTCC hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in BITY | Only in BTCC |
|---|---|
| Invesco Government & Agency Portfolio 12 38.47% | TREASURY BILL 100.00% |
| iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF 25.12% | |
| Cash & Other 16.45% | |
| MBTX 12/18/2026 169.25 C 12.94% | |
| United States Treasury Bill 11/05/2026 10.90% | |
| United States Treasury Bill 09/29/2026 0.44% | |
| MBTX 09/22/2026 188.42 C -1.93% | |
| MBTX 12/18/2026 169.25 P -2.38% |
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 21, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BITY | BTCC | BITY | BTCC | BITY | BTCC | |
| 3 months | +15.7% | +12.8% | 6.0% | 10.4% | −13.5 pts | −16.4 pts |
| 6 months | +2.6% | +4.3% | 11.4% | 20.2% | −13.1 pts | −11.4 pts |
| 1 year | −37.8% | −32.5% | 15.1% | 29.0% | −6.7 pts | −1.4 pts |
| Since launch | −20.9% | −17.7% | 26.9% | 53.5% | −5.8 pts | −10.8 pts |
| BITY Amplify Bitcoin 2% Monthly Option Income ETF Option income on IBIT, paying monthly | BTCC Grayscale Bitcoin Covered Call ETF Covered call on IBIT, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Amplify | Grayscale |
| Strategy | option income | covered call |
| Benchmark | Bitcoin (IBIT) | Bitcoin (IBIT) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 23.8% | 20.2% |
| Expense ratio | 0.65% | 0.65% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 15.1% | 29.0% |
| Price change, 1 year | −51.5% | −59.1% |
| Total return, 1 year | −37.8% | −32.5% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | −31.1% | −31.1% |
| Ahead or behind | −6.7 pts | −1.4 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 507 days | 534 days |
| Net assets | $14m | $17m |
BITY in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, BITY paid 15.1% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 51.5%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −37.8%. Bitcoin (IBIT) returned −31.1% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 6.7 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 23.8%, paid monthly.
BTCC in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, BTCC paid 29.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 59.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −32.5%. Bitcoin (IBIT) returned −31.1% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 1.4 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 20.2%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, BITY or BTCC?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, BITY paid 15.1% of its starting price in cash and BTCC paid 29.0%, so BTCC paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, BITY or BTCC?
- With every distribution reinvested, BITY returned −37.8% and BTCC returned −32.5% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so BTCC returned more.
- Which is cheaper, BITY or BTCC?
- BITY charges 0.65% a year and BTCC charges 0.65%, so BITY 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, BITY against BTCC, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/bity-vs-btcc Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.