Data as of .
BUCK vs TLTW: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year TLTW paid 9.6% of its price in cash against BUCK’s 6.9%, though BUCK returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: BUCK 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, BUCK and TLTW hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in BUCK | Only in TLTW |
|---|---|
| SIMPLIFY EXCHANGE TRADED FUNDS 100.00% | TREASURY BOND 4.56% |
| TREASURY BOND 4.33% | |
| TREASURY BOND 4.23% | |
| TREASURY BOND (2OLD) 4.18% | |
| TREASURY BOND 4.09% | |
| TREASURY BOND (OLD) 4.07% | |
| TREASURY BOND 4.03% | |
| TREASURY BOND 3.99% |
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 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUCK | TLTW | BUCK | TLTW | BUCK | TLTW | |
| 3 months | +1.1% | −4.3% | 1.5% | 1.9% | +6.3 pts | +0.9 pts |
| 6 months | +2.4% | −1.6% | 3.2% | 4.3% | +5.5 pts | +1.5 pts |
| 1 year | +4.9% | −0.5% | 6.9% | 9.6% | +9.6 pts | +4.2 pts |
| 3 years | +16.4% | +5.2% | 21.6% | 33.6% | +17.0 pts | +5.8 pts |
| Since launch | +21.1% | −4.0% | 25.4% | 41.3% | +23.1 pts | +11.4 pts |
| BUCK Simplify Treasury Option Income ETF Option income on TLT, paying monthly | TLTW iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond BuyWrite Strategy ETF Covered call on TLT, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Simplify | iShares |
| Strategy | option income | covered call |
| Benchmark | 20+ Year Treasury (TLT) | 20+ Year Treasury (TLT) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 6.2% | 7.5% |
| Expense ratio | 0.35% | 0.35% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 6.9% | 9.6% |
| Price change, 1 year | −2.2% | −9.9% |
| Total return, 1 year | +4.9% | −0.5% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | −4.7% | −4.7% |
| Ahead or behind | +9.6 pts | +4.2 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 1421 days | 1488 days |
| Net assets | $510m | $1.8bn |
BUCK in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, BUCK paid 6.9% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 2.2%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +4.9%. 20+ Year Treasury (TLT) returned −4.7% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 9.6 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 6.2%, paid monthly.
TLTW in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, TLTW paid 9.6% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 9.9%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −0.5%. 20+ Year Treasury (TLT) returned −4.7% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 4.2 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 7.5%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, BUCK or TLTW?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, BUCK paid 6.9% of its starting price in cash and TLTW paid 9.6%, so TLTW paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, BUCK or TLTW?
- With every distribution reinvested, BUCK returned +4.9% and TLTW returned −0.5% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so BUCK returned more.
- Which is cheaper, BUCK or TLTW?
- BUCK charges 0.35% a year and TLTW charges 0.35%, so BUCK 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, BUCK against TLTW, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/buck-vs-tltw Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.