Data as of .
BITY vs ETCO: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year ETCO paid 35.2% of its price in cash against BITY’s 15.1%, though BITY returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: ETCO 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 ETCO hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in BITY | Only in ETCO |
|---|---|
| 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 | ETCO | BITY | ETCO | BITY | ETCO | |
| 3 months | +15.7% | +18.4% | 6.0% | 11.7% | −13.5 pts | −36.3 pts |
| 6 months | +2.6% | −1.3% | 11.4% | 22.6% | −13.1 pts | −25.1 pts |
| 1 year | −37.8% | −47.4% | 15.1% | 35.2% | −6.7 pts | −4.8 pts |
| Since launch | −20.9% | −43.1% | 26.9% | 38.1% | −5.8 pts | −4.7 pts |
| BITY Amplify Bitcoin 2% Monthly Option Income ETF Option income on IBIT, paying monthly | ETCO Grayscale Ethereum Covered Call ETF Covered call on ETHA, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Amplify | Grayscale |
| Strategy | option income | covered call |
| Benchmark | Bitcoin (IBIT) | Ether (ETHA) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 23.8% | 19.8% |
| Expense ratio | 0.65% | 0.65% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 15.1% | 35.2% |
| Price change, 1 year | −51.5% | −75.5% |
| Total return, 1 year | −37.8% | −47.4% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | −31.1% | −42.6% |
| Ahead or behind | −6.7 pts | −4.8 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 507 days | 379 days |
| Net assets | $14m | $4m |
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.
ETCO in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, ETCO paid 35.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 75.5%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −47.4%. Ether (ETHA) returned −42.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 4.8 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 19.8%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, BITY or ETCO?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, BITY paid 15.1% of its starting price in cash and ETCO paid 35.2%, so ETCO 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 ETCO?
- With every distribution reinvested, BITY returned −37.8% and ETCO returned −47.4% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so BITY returned more.
- Which is cheaper, BITY or ETCO?
- BITY charges 0.65% a year and ETCO 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 ETCO, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/bity-vs-etco Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.