Data as of .
QLDY vs SCLZ: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year QLDY paid 29.2% of its price in cash against SCLZ’s 8.4%, though SCLZ returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: SCLZ 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, QLDY and SCLZ hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in QLDY | Only in SCLZ |
|---|---|
| Ndx 12/18/2026 2001.44 C 94.80% | MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC 7.89% |
| First American Government Obligations Fu 4.77% | APPLE INC 6.15% |
| United States Treasury Note/bond 2.375% 0.53% | NVIDIA CORP 5.99% |
| Ndxp Us 09/21/26 P29500 0.08% | ALPHABET INC 5.18% |
| Xnd 12/18/2026 10.44 C 0.05% | ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC 5.14% |
| Cash & Other -0.06% | BROADCOM INC 4.71% |
| Nasdaq-1 Put Opt 09/26 29650 -0.16% | ELI LILLY & COMPANY 3.86% |
| AMAZON.COM INC 3.75% |
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 21, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QLDY | SCLZ | QLDY | SCLZ | QLDY | SCLZ | |
| 3 months | −6.6% | +2.9% | 8.3% | 2.1% | −4.1 pts | −3.6 pts |
| 6 months | +20.1% | +14.2% | 18.7% | 3.8% | −4.2 pts | +1.6 pts |
| 1 year | +10.6% | +13.2% | 29.2% | 8.4% | −11.2 pts | −14.0 pts |
| Since launch | +10.6% | +36.5% | 29.2% | 19.6% | −11.2 pts | −6.3 pts |
| QLDY Defiance Nasdaq 100 LightningSpread(TM) Income ETF Option income on QQQ, paying weekly | SCLZ Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF Dividend stocks with call overlay on SCHD, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Defiance | Swan |
| Strategy | option income | dividend stocks with call overlay |
| Benchmark | Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) | US dividend stocks (SCHD), used as the dividend proxy |
| Pays | weekly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 19.6% | 8.5% |
| Expense ratio | 1.04% | 0.79% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 29.2% | 8.4% |
| Price change, 1 year | −20.3% | +4.1% |
| Total return, 1 year | +10.6% | +13.2% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +21.8% | +27.2% |
| Ahead or behind | −11.2 pts | −14.0 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | 100% | not published |
| Age | 365 days | 934 days |
| Net assets | $52m | $20m |
QLDY in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, QLDY paid 29.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 20.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +10.6%. Nasdaq-100 (QQQ) returned +21.8% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 11.2 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 19.6%, paid weekly. Defiance estimates that 100% of the distribution paid Sep 17, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).
SCLZ in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, SCLZ paid 8.4% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 4.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +13.2%. US dividend stocks (SCHD), used as the dividend proxy returned +27.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 14.0 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 8.5%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, QLDY or SCLZ?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, QLDY paid 29.2% of its starting price in cash and SCLZ paid 8.4%, so QLDY paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, QLDY or SCLZ?
- With every distribution reinvested, QLDY returned +10.6% and SCLZ returned +13.2% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so SCLZ returned more.
- Which is cheaper, QLDY or SCLZ?
- QLDY charges 1.04% a year and SCLZ charges 0.79%, so SCLZ 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, QLDY against SCLZ, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/qldy-vs-sclz Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.