Data as of .
QUSA vs RNTY: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year QUSA paid 13.8% of its price in cash against RNTY’s 11.9%, though RNTY returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: RNTY 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, QUSA and RNTY hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in QUSA | Only in RNTY |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Corp 6.08% | Welltower Inc 6.72% |
| Apple Inc 5.99% | Prologis Inc 6.58% |
| NVIDIA Corp 5.78% | Digital Realty Trust Inc 6.18% |
| Berkshire Hathaway Inc 5.35% | Texas Pacific Land Corp 4.94% |
| Caterpillar Inc 4.91% | Simon Property Group Inc 4.92% |
| Broadcom Inc 4.70% | Equinix Inc 4.91% |
| Costco Wholesale Corp 4.40% | Iron Mountain Inc 4.19% |
| Coca-Cola Co/The 4.33% | St Joe Co/The 4.17% |
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 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QUSA | RNTY | QUSA | RNTY | QUSA | RNTY | |
| 3 months | −1.9% | −2.3% | 3.6% | 3.0% | −3.6 pts | −4.5 pts |
| 6 months | +10.4% | +2.5% | 7.8% | 6.2% | −4.3 pts | −15.6 pts |
| 1 year | +3.5% | +4.6% | 13.8% | 11.9% | −11.7 pts | −12.0 pts |
| Since launch | +4.9% | +7.9% | 15.1% | 15.8% | −25.8 pts | −39.2 pts |
| QUSA VistaShares Target 15 USA Quality Income ETF Covered call on QUAL, paying monthly | RNTY YieldMax(R) Target 12(TM) Real Estate Option Income ETF Synthetic covered call on SPY, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | VistaShares | YieldMax |
| Strategy | covered call | synthetic covered call |
| Benchmark | USA Quality (QUAL), used as the quality proxy | S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 15.3% | 12.5% |
| Expense ratio | 0.97% | 0.99% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 13.8% | 11.9% |
| Price change, 1 year | −11.0% | −7.3% |
| Total return, 1 year | +3.5% | +4.6% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +15.2% | +16.6% |
| Ahead or behind | −11.7 pts | −12.0 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | 0% |
| Age | 500 days | 519 days |
| Net assets | $22m | $6m |
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.
RNTY in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, RNTY paid 11.9% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 7.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +4.6%. S&P 500 (SPY), used as a default proxy returned +16.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 12.0 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 12.5%, paid monthly. YieldMax estimates that 0% of the distribution paid Sep 3, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, QUSA or RNTY?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, QUSA paid 13.8% of its starting price in cash and RNTY paid 11.9%, so QUSA paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, QUSA or RNTY?
- With every distribution reinvested, QUSA returned +3.5% and RNTY returned +4.6% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so RNTY returned more.
- Which is cheaper, QUSA or RNTY?
- QUSA charges 0.97% a year and RNTY charges 0.99%, 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, QUSA against RNTY, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/qusa-vs-rnty Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.