Data as of .
NLSI vs SDVD: which paid, and which earned it?
NLSI and SDVD both write options for income.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, NLSI and SDVD hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | NLSI | SDVD |
|---|---|---|
| Jack Henry & Associates Inc | 3.32% | 0.39% |
| Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co | 2.98% | 0.26% |
| Only in NLSI | Only in SDVD |
|---|---|
| Micron Technology Inc 14.23% | National HealthCare Corporation 1.12% |
| F5 Inc 3.90% | First BanCorp. 1.04% |
| Progressive Corp/The 3.80% | OFG Bancorp 1.03% |
| Adobe Inc 3.37% | The Hanover Insurance Group, Inc. 1.01% |
| Universal Health Services Inc 3.23% | Interparfums, Inc. 1.00% |
| Insulet Corp 3.19% | Reinsurance Group of America, Incorporat 1.00% |
| Veeva Systems Inc 3.19% | VeriSign, Inc. 1.00% |
| PTC Inc 3.18% | Assurant, Inc. 0.99% |
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 Jun 30, 2026 and Sep 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NLSI | SDVD | NLSI | SDVD | NLSI | SDVD | |
| 3 months | +15.6% | −0.1% | 1.4% | 2.1% | +13.3 pts | −6.7 pts |
| 6 months | +24.6% | +8.3% | 2.8% | 4.4% | +6.6 pts | −4.3 pts |
| 1 year | not published | +10.8% | not published | 9.2% | not published | −16.4 pts |
| 3 years | not published | +53.0% | not published | 30.7% | not published | −0.7 pts |
| Since launch | +19.3% | +47.6% | 4.0% | 29.7% | +7.3 pts | −4.1 pts |
| NLSI NEOS Long/Short Equity Income ETF Option income on SPY, paying monthly | SDVD FT Vest SMID Rising Dividend Achievers Target Income ETF Dividend stocks with call overlay on SCHD, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | NEOS | First Trust |
| Strategy | option income | dividend stocks with call overlay |
| Benchmark | S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy | US dividend stocks (SCHD), used as the dividend proxy |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 5.1% | 8.8% |
| Expense ratio | 2.89% | 0.85% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 4.0% (since launch on Dec 10, 2025) | 9.2% |
| Price change, 1 year | +14.6% | +1.2% |
| Total return, 1 year | +19.3% (since launch on Dec 10, 2025) | +10.8% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +12.0% | +27.2% |
| Ahead or behind | +7.3 pts | −16.4 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | 100% | not published |
| Age | 282 days | 1135 days |
| Net assets | $5m | $888m |
NLSI in plain words
Over the period since launch on Dec 10, 2025 to Sep 18, 2026, NLSI paid 4.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 14.6%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +19.3%. S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy returned +12.0% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 7.3 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 5.1%, paid monthly. NEOS estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Jul 31, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).
SDVD in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, SDVD paid 9.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 1.2%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +10.8%. US dividend stocks (SCHD), used as the dividend proxy returned +27.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 16.4 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 8.8%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which is cheaper, NLSI or SDVD?
- NLSI charges 2.89% a year and SDVD charges 0.85%, so SDVD 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, NLSI against SDVD, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/nlsi-vs-sdvd Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.