Data as of .
OARK vs QUSA: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year OARK paid 37.4% of its price in cash against QUSA’s 13.8%, and returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: QUSA 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, OARK and QUSA hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in OARK | Only in QUSA |
|---|---|
| TREASURY BILL 37.81% | Microsoft Corp 6.08% |
| TREASURY BILL 30.32% | Apple Inc 5.99% |
| TREASURY BILL 18.55% | NVIDIA Corp 5.78% |
| TREASURY BILL 10.80% | Berkshire Hathaway Inc 5.35% |
| TREASURY BILL 2.51% | 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 Apr 30, 2026 and Sep 21, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OARK | QUSA | OARK | QUSA | OARK | QUSA | |
| 3 months | +3.9% | −1.9% | 9.0% | 3.6% | +6.4 pts | −3.6 pts |
| 6 months | +20.0% | +10.4% | 22.6% | 7.8% | −4.2 pts | −4.3 pts |
| 1 year | +6.6% | +3.5% | 37.4% | 13.8% | −15.2 pts | −11.7 pts |
| 3 years | +61.9% | not published | 87.5% | not published | −36.3 pts | not published |
| Since launch | +58.8% | +4.9% | 89.4% | 15.1% | −96.7 pts | −25.8 pts |
| OARK YieldMax(R) Innovation Option Income Strategy ETF Synthetic covered call on QQQ, paying weekly | QUSA VistaShares Target 15 USA Quality Income ETF Covered call on QUAL, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | YieldMax | VistaShares |
| Strategy | synthetic covered call | covered call |
| Benchmark | Nasdaq-100 (QQQ), used as the innovation proxy | USA Quality (QUAL), used as the quality proxy |
| Pays | weekly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 27.9% | 15.3% |
| Expense ratio | 1.00% | 0.97% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 37.4% | 13.8% |
| Price change, 1 year | −34.0% | −11.0% |
| Total return, 1 year | +6.6% | +3.5% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +21.8% | +15.2% |
| Ahead or behind | −15.2 pts | −11.7 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | 0% | not published |
| Age | 1395 days | 500 days |
| Net assets | $32m | $22m |
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).
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, OARK or QUSA?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, OARK paid 37.4% of its starting price in cash and QUSA paid 13.8%, 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, OARK or QUSA?
- With every distribution reinvested, OARK returned +6.6% and QUSA returned +3.5% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so OARK returned more.
- Which is cheaper, OARK or QUSA?
- OARK charges 1.00% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, OARK against QUSA, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/oark-vs-qusa Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.