Data as of .
OMAH vs SDVD: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year OMAH paid 14.4% of its price in cash against SDVD’s 9.2%, though SDVD returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: OMAH 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, OMAH and SDVD hold 2% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | OMAH | SDVD |
|---|---|---|
| VeriSign Inc | 4.90% | 1.00% |
| New York Times Co/The | 2.80% | 0.85% |
| Only in OMAH | Only in SDVD |
|---|---|
| Apple Inc 10.59% | National HealthCare Corporation 1.12% |
| Berkshire Hathaway Inc 10.22% | First BanCorp. 1.04% |
| American Express Co 6.57% | OFG Bancorp 1.03% |
| Coca-Cola Co/The 4.94% | The Hanover Insurance Group, Inc. 1.01% |
| Kroger Co/The 4.79% | Interparfums, Inc. 1.00% |
| Chevron Corp 4.75% | Reinsurance Group of America, Incorporat 1.00% |
| DAVITA INC 4.75% | Assurant, Inc. 0.99% |
| Occidental Petroleum Corp 4.64% | Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. (Class A 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 Sep 18, 2026 and Sep 21, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OMAH | SDVD | OMAH | SDVD | OMAH | SDVD | |
| 3 months | +1.7% | −0.1% | 3.7% | 2.1% | −2.4 pts | −6.7 pts |
| 6 months | +8.8% | +8.3% | 7.7% | 4.4% | +2.8 pts | −4.3 pts |
| 1 year | +8.8% | +10.8% | 14.4% | 9.2% | +4.9 pts | −16.4 pts |
| 3 years | not published | +53.0% | not published | 30.7% | not published | −0.7 pts |
| Since launch | +14.6% | +47.6% | 21.4% | 29.7% | +12.4 pts | −4.1 pts |
| OMAH VistaShares Target 15 Berkshire Select Income ETF Covered call on BRK-B, paying monthly | SDVD FT Vest SMID Rising Dividend Achievers Target Income ETF Dividend stocks with call overlay on SCHD, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | VistaShares | First Trust |
| Strategy | covered call | dividend stocks with call overlay |
| Benchmark | Berkshire Hathaway B (BRK-B), used as the proxy | US dividend stocks (SCHD), used as the dividend proxy |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 15.1% | 8.8% |
| Expense ratio | 0.98% | 0.85% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 14.4% | 9.2% |
| Price change, 1 year | −6.3% | +1.2% |
| Total return, 1 year | +8.8% | +10.8% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +3.9% | +27.2% |
| Ahead or behind | +4.9 pts | −16.4 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 562 days | 1135 days |
| Net assets | $1.1bn | $888m |
OMAH in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, OMAH paid 14.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 6.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +8.8%. Berkshire Hathaway B (BRK-B), used as the proxy returned +3.9% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 4.9 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 15.1%, paid monthly.
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 paid more, OMAH or SDVD?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, OMAH paid 14.4% of its starting price in cash and SDVD paid 9.2%, so OMAH paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, OMAH or SDVD?
- With every distribution reinvested, OMAH returned +8.8% and SDVD returned +10.8% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so SDVD returned more.
- Which is cheaper, OMAH or SDVD?
- OMAH charges 0.98% 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, OMAH against SDVD, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/omah-vs-sdvd Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.