Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

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

Over the year OARK paid 37.4% of its price in cash against MAGY’s 26.5%, and returned more with it reinvested.

Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF and YieldMax(R) Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF.

26.5%MAGY cash paid, 1 year
37.4%OARK cash paid, 1 year
+1.8%MAGY total return, 1 year
+6.6%OARK total return, 1 year

ETFIQ Return Stability Score: MAGY scores higher

Was the payout funded by returns, or by your own capital?

MAGY 22.6OARK 10.13.8, the lowest in this set96.8, the highest

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

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
OARK15.2 pts behind QQQ · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
QQQ+21.8%OARK+6.6%37.4% as cash15.2 pts behind QQQTotal return, distributions reinvestedQQQ+21.8%OARK+6.6%15.2 pts behind QQQ

What they hold in common

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

Only in each
Only in MAGYOnly in OARK
Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF 100.02%TREASURY BILL 37.81%
First American Government Obligations Fu 0.36%TREASURY BILL 30.32%
MAGS 09/25/2026 71.37 C -0.38%TREASURY BILL 18.55%
TREASURY BILL 10.80%
TREASURY BILL 2.51%

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

MAGY and OARK over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
MAGYOARKMAGYOARKMAGYOARK
3 months+3.7%+3.9%6.1%9.0%−3.9 pts+6.4 pts
6 months+8.1%+20.0%12.9%22.6%−12.7 pts−4.2 pts
1 year+1.8%+6.6%26.5%37.4%−9.4 pts−15.2 pts
3 yearsnot published+61.9%not published87.5%not published−36.3 pts
Since launch+25.6%+58.8%42.0%89.4%−37.5 pts−96.7 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
MAGY and OARK on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MAGY
Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF
Covered call on MAGS, paying weekly
OARK
YieldMax(R) Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF
Synthetic covered call on QQQ, paying weekly
IssuerRoundhillYieldMax
Strategycovered callsynthetic covered call
BenchmarkMagnificent Seven (MAGS)Nasdaq-100 (QQQ), used as the innovation proxy
Paysweeklyweekly
Payout rate, annualized19.2%27.9%
Expense ratio0.99%1.00%
Cash paid, 1 year26.5%37.4%
Price change, 1 year−25.3%−34.0%
Total return, 1 year+1.8%+6.6%
Benchmark return, 1 year+11.2%+21.8%
Ahead or behind−9.4 pts−15.2 pts
Return of capital, latest estimatenot published0%
Age513 days1395 days
Net assets$102m$32m

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.

OARK in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, OARK paid 37.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 34.0%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +6.6%. Nasdaq-100 (QQQ), used as the innovation proxy returned +21.8% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 15.2 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 27.9%, paid weekly. YieldMax estimates that 0% of the distribution paid Sep 18, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).

Questions people ask

Which paid more, MAGY or OARK?
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, MAGY paid 26.5% of its starting price in cash and OARK paid 37.4%, so OARK paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
Which returned more once distributions are counted, MAGY or OARK?
With every distribution reinvested, MAGY returned +1.8% and OARK returned +6.6% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so OARK returned more.
Which is cheaper, MAGY or OARK?
MAGY charges 0.99% a year and OARK charges 1.00%, so MAGY 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.

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

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources