Data as of .
QUSA vs YMAG: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year YMAG paid 35.5% of its price in cash against QUSA’s 13.8%, and returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: YMAG 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 YMAG hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in QUSA | Only in YMAG |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Corp 6.08% | YieldMax GOOGL Option Income S 15.87% |
| Apple Inc 5.99% | Yieldmax Amzn Option Income ETF 14.60% |
| NVIDIA Corp 5.78% | YieldMax AAPL Option Income Strategy ETF 14.37% |
| Berkshire Hathaway Inc 5.35% | Yieldmax Tsla Option Income ETF 14.08% |
| Caterpillar Inc 4.91% | YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF 14.02% |
| Broadcom Inc 4.70% | YieldMax NVDA Option Income Strategy ETF 13.98% |
| Costco Wholesale Corp 4.40% | Yieldmax Meta Option Income Strategy ETF 13.08% |
| 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 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QUSA | YMAG | QUSA | YMAG | QUSA | YMAG | |
| 3 months | −1.9% | +6.1% | 3.6% | 9.4% | −3.6 pts | −1.6 pts |
| 6 months | +10.4% | +15.4% | 7.8% | 21.1% | −4.3 pts | −5.3 pts |
| 1 year | +3.5% | +9.7% | 13.8% | 35.5% | −11.7 pts | −1.5 pts |
| Since launch | +4.9% | +70.7% | 15.1% | 89.1% | −25.8 pts | −34.1 pts |
| QUSA VistaShares Target 15 USA Quality Income ETF Covered call on QUAL, paying monthly | YMAG YieldMax(R) Magnificent 7 Fund of Option Income ETFs Synthetic covered call on MAGS, paying weekly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | VistaShares | YieldMax |
| Strategy | covered call | synthetic covered call |
| Benchmark | USA Quality (QUAL), used as the quality proxy | Magnificent Seven (MAGS) |
| Pays | monthly | weekly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 15.3% | 30.9% |
| Expense ratio | 0.97% | 1.34% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 13.8% | 35.5% |
| Price change, 1 year | −11.0% | −28.1% |
| Total return, 1 year | +3.5% | +9.7% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +15.2% | +11.2% |
| Ahead or behind | −11.7 pts | −1.5 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | 80% |
| Age | 500 days | 962 days |
| Net assets | $22m | $297m |
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.
YMAG in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, YMAG paid 35.5% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 28.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +9.7%. Magnificent Seven (MAGS) returned +11.2% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 1.5 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 30.9%, paid weekly. YieldMax estimates that 80% 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).
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, QUSA or YMAG?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, QUSA paid 13.8% of its starting price in cash and YMAG paid 35.5%, so YMAG 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 YMAG?
- With every distribution reinvested, QUSA returned +3.5% and YMAG returned +9.7% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so YMAG returned more.
- Which is cheaper, QUSA or YMAG?
- QUSA charges 0.97% a year and YMAG charges 1.34%, 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 YMAG, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/qusa-vs-ymag Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.