Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

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

Over the year MAGY paid 26.5% of its price in cash against QUSA’s 13.8%, though QUSA returned more with it reinvested.

Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF and VistaShares Target 15 USA Quality Income ETF.

26.5%MAGY cash paid, 1 year
13.8%QUSA cash paid, 1 year
+1.8%MAGY total return, 1 year
+3.5%QUSA total return, 1 year

ETFIQ Return Stability Score: MAGY scores higher

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

MAGY 22.6QUSA 21.43.8, 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
QUSA11.7 pts behind QUAL · 1 year to Sep 18, 2026
QUAL+15.2%QUSA+3.5%13.8% as cash11.7 pts behind QUALTotal return, distributions reinvestedQUAL+15.2%QUSA+3.5%11.7 pts behind QUAL

What they hold in common

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

Only in each
Only in MAGYOnly in QUSA
Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF 100.02%Microsoft Corp 6.08%
First American Government Obligations Fu 0.36%Apple Inc 5.99%
MAGS 09/25/2026 71.37 C -0.38%NVIDIA Corp 5.78%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc 5.35%
Caterpillar Inc 4.91%
Broadcom Inc 4.70%
Costco Wholesale Corp 4.40%
Coca-Cola Co/The 4.33%

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

MAGY and QUSA over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnCash paidAgainst the benchmark
MAGYQUSAMAGYQUSAMAGYQUSA
3 months+3.7%−1.9%6.1%3.6%−3.9 pts−3.6 pts
6 months+8.1%+10.4%12.9%7.8%−12.7 pts−4.3 pts
1 year+1.8%+3.5%26.5%13.8%−9.4 pts−11.7 pts
Since launch+25.6%+4.9%42.0%15.1%−37.5 pts−25.8 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
MAGY and QUSA on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MAGY
Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF
Covered call on MAGS, paying weekly
QUSA
VistaShares Target 15 USA Quality Income ETF
Covered call on QUAL, paying monthly
IssuerRoundhillVistaShares
Strategycovered callcovered call
BenchmarkMagnificent Seven (MAGS)USA Quality (QUAL), used as the quality proxy
Paysweeklymonthly
Payout rate, annualized19.2%15.3%
Expense ratio0.99%0.97%
Cash paid, 1 year26.5%13.8%
Price change, 1 year−25.3%−11.0%
Total return, 1 year+1.8%+3.5%
Benchmark return, 1 year+11.2%+15.2%
Ahead or behind−9.4 pts−11.7 pts
Return of capital, latest estimatenot publishednot published
Age513 days500 days
Net assets$102m$22m

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.

QUSA in plain words

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, QUSA paid 13.8% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 11.0%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +3.5%. USA Quality (QUAL), used as the quality proxy returned +15.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 11.7 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 15.3%, paid monthly.

Questions people ask

Which paid more, MAGY or QUSA?
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, MAGY paid 26.5% of its starting price in cash and QUSA paid 13.8%, so MAGY 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 QUSA?
With every distribution reinvested, MAGY returned +1.8% and QUSA returned +3.5% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so QUSA returned more.
Which is cheaper, MAGY or QUSA?
MAGY charges 0.99% a year and QUSA charges 0.97%, so QUSA 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 QUSA, 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 QUSA, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/magy-vs-qusa Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources