Data as of .
MAGY vs SPIN: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year MAGY paid 26.5% of its price in cash against SPIN’s 5.2%, though SPIN returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: SPIN 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, MAGY and SPIN hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in MAGY | Only in SPIN |
|---|---|
| Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF 100.02% | NVIDIA CORP 9.79% |
| First American Government Obligations Fu 0.36% | MICROSOFT CORP 7.15% |
| MAGS 09/25/2026 71.37 C -0.38% | APPLE INC 6.07% |
| ALPHABET INC CL A 5.65% | |
| AMAZON.COM INC 4.84% | |
| META PLATFORMS INC CLASS A 3.24% | |
| BROADCOM INC 3.16% | |
| MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC 2.82% |
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 17, 2026 and Sep 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAGY | SPIN | MAGY | SPIN | MAGY | SPIN | |
| 3 months | +3.7% | +3.7% | 6.1% | 0.8% | −3.9 pts | +1.4 pts |
| 6 months | +8.1% | +12.3% | 12.9% | 3.2% | −12.7 pts | −5.8 pts |
| 1 year | +1.8% | +11.3% | 26.5% | 5.2% | −9.4 pts | −5.2 pts |
| Since launch | +25.6% | +28.5% | 42.0% | 15.2% | −37.5 pts | −13.7 pts |
| MAGY Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF Covered call on MAGS, paying weekly | SPIN State Street(R) US Equity Premium Income ETF Covered call on SPY, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Roundhill | State Street |
| Strategy | covered call | covered call |
| Benchmark | Magnificent Seven (MAGS) | S&P 500 (SPY) |
| Pays | weekly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 19.2% | 2.7% |
| Expense ratio | 0.99% | 0.25% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 26.5% | 5.2% |
| Price change, 1 year | −25.3% | +5.8% |
| Total return, 1 year | +1.8% | +11.3% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +11.2% | +16.6% |
| Ahead or behind | −9.4 pts | −5.2 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 513 days | 743 days |
| Net assets | $102m | $47m |
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.
SPIN in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, SPIN paid 5.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 5.8%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +11.3%. S&P 500 (SPY) returned +16.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 5.2 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 2.7%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, MAGY or SPIN?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, MAGY paid 26.5% of its starting price in cash and SPIN paid 5.2%, 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 SPIN?
- With every distribution reinvested, MAGY returned +1.8% and SPIN returned +11.3% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so SPIN returned more.
- Which is cheaper, MAGY or SPIN?
- MAGY charges 0.99% a year and SPIN charges 0.25%, so SPIN 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, MAGY against SPIN, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/magy-vs-spin Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.