Data as of .
EGGY vs JANH: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year EGGY paid 28.1% of its price in cash against JANH’s 6.1%, and returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: JANH 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, EGGY and JANH hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in EGGY | Only in JANH |
|---|---|
| Seagate Technology Holdings PL 12.31% | TREASURY BILL 96.95% |
| Bloom Energy Corp 10.77% | TREASURY BILL 1.53% |
| Micron Technology Inc 7.95% | TREASURY BILL 1.52% |
| Lumentum Holdings Inc 6.86% | |
| Astera Labs Inc 6.85% | |
| Coherent Corp 5.81% | |
| Vertiv Holdings Co 5.60% | |
| Advanced Micro Devices Inc 4.86% |
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 May 31, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EGGY | JANH | EGGY | JANH | EGGY | JANH | |
| 3 months | −15.1% | +1.6% | 7.1% | 1.6% | −17.3 pts | −0.6 pts |
| 6 months | +27.6% | +6.9% | 19.4% | 3.2% | +9.6 pts | −11.1 pts |
| 1 year | +15.3% | +6.5% | 28.1% | 6.1% | −1.2 pts | −10.1 pts |
| Since launch | +42.3% | +19.8% | 45.5% | 16.1% | +11.8 pts | −46.6 pts |
| EGGY NestYield Dynamic Income ETF Option income on SPY, paying monthly | JANH Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - January Defined income on SPY, paying quarterly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Nest Egg | Innovator |
| Strategy | option income | defined income |
| Benchmark | S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy | S&P 500 (SPY) |
| Pays | monthly | quarterly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 34.8% | 6.2% |
| Expense ratio | 0.92% | 0.79% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 28.1% | 6.1% |
| Price change, 1 year | −16.2% | 0.0% |
| Total return, 1 year | +15.3% | +6.5% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +16.6% | +16.6% |
| Ahead or behind | −1.2 pts | −10.1 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 630 days | 990 days |
| Net assets | $126m | $14m |
EGGY in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, EGGY paid 28.1% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 16.2%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +15.3%. S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy returned +16.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 1.2 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 34.8%, paid monthly.
JANH in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, JANH paid 6.1% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 0.0%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +6.5%. S&P 500 (SPY) returned +16.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 10.1 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 6.2%, paid quarterly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, EGGY or JANH?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, EGGY paid 28.1% of its starting price in cash and JANH paid 6.1%, so EGGY paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, EGGY or JANH?
- With every distribution reinvested, EGGY returned +15.3% and JANH returned +6.5% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so EGGY returned more.
- Which is cheaper, EGGY or JANH?
- EGGY charges 0.92% a year and JANH charges 0.79%, so JANH 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, EGGY against JANH, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/eggy-vs-janh Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.