Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

CAIQ vs MAGY: which paid, and which earned it?

CAIQ and MAGY both write options for income.

Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF and Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF.

13.7%CAIQ cash paid, 1 year
26.5%MAGY cash paid, 1 year
+16.7%CAIQ total return, 1 year
+1.8%MAGY total return, 1 year
CAIQ7 pts behind QQQ · since launch to Sep 18, 2026
QQQ+23.6%CAIQ+16.7%13.7% of it arrived as cash7 pts behind QQQTotal return, distributions reinvestedQQQ+23.6%CAIQ+16.7%13.7% cash7 pts behind QQQ
MAGY9.4 pts behind MAGS · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
MAGS+11.2%MAGY+1.8%9.4 pts behind MAGSTotal return, distributions reinvestedMAGS+11.2%MAGY+1.8%9.4 pts behind MAGS

What they hold in common

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

Only in each
Only in CAIQOnly in MAGY
Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF 100.00%Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF 100.02%
First American Government Obligations Fu 0.36%
MAGS 09/25/2026 71.37 C -0.38%

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 Apr 30, 2026 and Sep 18, 2026.

Performance, window by window

CAIQ and MAGY over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
CAIQMAGYCAIQMAGYCAIQMAGY
3 months−0.5%+3.7%4.3%6.1%+1.9 pts−3.9 pts
6 months+16.5%+8.1%9.5%12.9%−7.7 pts−12.7 pts
1 yearnot published+1.8%not published26.5%not published−9.4 pts
Since launch+16.7%+25.6%13.7%42.0%−7.0 pts−37.5 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
CAIQ and MAGY on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CAIQ
Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF
Option income on QQQ, paying monthly
MAGY
Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF
Covered call on MAGS, paying weekly
IssuerCalamosRoundhill
Strategyoption incomecovered call
BenchmarkNasdaq-100 (QQQ)Magnificent Seven (MAGS)
Paysmonthlyweekly
Payout rate, annualized17.9%19.2%
Expense ratio0.74%0.99%
Cash paid, 1 year13.7% (since launch on Nov 20, 2025)26.5%
Price change, 1 year+2.1%−25.3%
Total return, 1 year+16.7% (since launch on Nov 20, 2025)+1.8%
Benchmark return, 1 year+23.6%+11.2%
Ahead or behind−7.0 pts−9.4 pts
Return of capital, latest estimatenot publishednot published
Age302 days513 days
Net assets$167m$102m

CAIQ in plain words

Over the period since launch on Nov 20, 2025 to Sep 18, 2026, CAIQ paid 13.7% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 2.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +16.7%. Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) returned +23.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 7.0 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 17.9%, paid monthly.

MAGY in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, MAGY paid 26.5% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 25.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +1.8%. Magnificent Seven (MAGS) returned +11.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 9.4 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 19.2%, paid weekly.

Questions people ask

Which is cheaper, CAIQ or MAGY?
CAIQ charges 0.74% a year and MAGY charges 0.99%, so CAIQ 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.

CAIQ against MAGY, 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, CAIQ against MAGY, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/caiq-vs-magy Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources