Data as of .
CSHI vs LQDW: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year LQDW paid 10.6% of its price in cash against CSHI’s 5.2%, though CSHI returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: CSHI 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, CSHI and LQDW hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in CSHI | Only in LQDW |
|---|---|
| United States Treasury Bill 12/10/2026 7.59% | BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY 0.74% |
| United States Treasury Bill 12/03/2026 7.45% | ANHEUSER-BUSCH COMPANIES LLC 0.19% |
| United States Treasury Bill 12/08/2026 7.45% | CVS HEALTH CORP 0.18% |
| United States Treasury Bill 11/24/2026 7.28% | T-MOBILE USA INC 0.18% |
| United States Treasury Bill 11/19/2026 7.27% | SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES COR 144A 0.17% |
| United States Treasury Bill 10/01/2026 7.24% | GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC/THE 0.15% |
| United States Treasury Bill 11/12/2026 7.16% | PFIZER INVESTMENT ENTERPRISES PTE 0.15% |
| United States Treasury Bill 09/24/2026 7.11% | AMAZON.COM INC 0.14% |
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 Sep 18, 2026 and Sep 21, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CSHI | LQDW | CSHI | LQDW | CSHI | LQDW | |
| 3 months | +1.1% | −1.6% | 1.2% | 2.3% | +0.2 pts | +1.2 pts |
| 6 months | +2.5% | +1.3% | 2.4% | 5.0% | +0.8 pts | +1.9 pts |
| 1 year | +5.0% | +1.8% | 5.2% | 10.6% | +1.3 pts | +3.8 pts |
| 3 years | +16.8% | +10.8% | 16.4% | 36.3% | +2.7 pts | −4.1 pts |
| Since launch | +23.8% | +8.7% | 22.0% | 46.4% | +4.6 pts | −4.0 pts |
| CSHI NEOS Enhanced Income 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF Covered call on BIL, paying monthly | LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond BuyWrite Strategy ETF Covered call on LQD, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | NEOS | iShares |
| Strategy | covered call | covered call |
| Benchmark | 1-3 month T-bills (BIL) | US investment grade bonds (LQD) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 5.0% | 8.1% |
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.34% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 5.2% | 10.6% |
| Price change, 1 year | −0.4% | −8.8% |
| Total return, 1 year | +5.0% | +1.8% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +3.7% | −2.0% |
| Ahead or behind | +1.3 pts | +3.8 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | 41% | not published |
| Age | 1480 days | 1488 days |
| Net assets | $1.9bn | $318m |
CSHI in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, CSHI paid 5.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 0.4%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +5.0%. 1-3 month T-bills (BIL) returned +3.7% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 1.3 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 5.0%, paid monthly. NEOS estimates that 41% of the distribution paid Sep 11, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).
LQDW in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, LQDW paid 10.6% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 8.8%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +1.8%. US investment grade bonds (LQD) returned −2.0% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 3.8 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 8.1%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, CSHI or LQDW?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, CSHI paid 5.2% of its starting price in cash and LQDW paid 10.6%, so LQDW paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, CSHI or LQDW?
- With every distribution reinvested, CSHI returned +5.0% and LQDW returned +1.8% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so CSHI returned more.
- Which is cheaper, CSHI or LQDW?
- CSHI charges 0.38% a year and LQDW charges 0.34%, so LQDW 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, CSHI against LQDW, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/cshi-vs-lqdw Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.