Data as of .
XLBI vs XLCI: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year XLBI paid 14.5% of its price in cash against XLCI’s 10.9%, and returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: XLCI 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, XLBI and XLCI hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | XLBI | XLCI |
|---|---|---|
| SSI US GOV MONEY MARKET CLASS | 0.40% | 0.38% |
| Only in XLBI | Only in XLCI |
|---|---|
| STATE STREET MATERIALS SELECT 100.35% | STATE STREET COMMUNICATION SER 99.79% |
| STATE STREET MATERIALS SELECT OCT26 52 CALL -0.75% | STATE STREET COMMUNICATION SER OCT26 117 CALL -0.17% |
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 Sep 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XLBI | XLCI | XLBI | XLCI | XLBI | XLCI | |
| 3 months | −0.7% | +3.2% | 3.3% | 2.9% | +2.4 pts | +1.6 pts |
| 6 months | +11.1% | +2.8% | 7.2% | 5.5% | +3.9 pts | +3.4 pts |
| 1 year | +8.8% | +2.2% | 14.5% | 10.9% | −3.2 pts | +7.9 pts |
| Since launch | +12.1% | +7.3% | 16.3% | 12.4% | −2.4 pts | +1.9 pts |
| XLBI State Street(R) Materials Select Sector SPDR(R) Premium Income ETF Covered call on XLB, paying monthly | XLCI State Street(R) Communication Services Select Sector SPDR(R) Premium Income ETF Covered call on XLC, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | State Street | State Street |
| Strategy | covered call | covered call |
| Benchmark | Materials (XLB) | Communication services (XLC) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 11.5% | 8.1% |
| Expense ratio | 0.35% | 0.35% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 14.5% | 10.9% |
| Price change, 1 year | −6.3% | −8.8% |
| Total return, 1 year | +8.8% | +2.2% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +12.0% | −5.7% |
| Ahead or behind | −3.2 pts | +7.9 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 415 days | 415 days |
| Net assets | $8m | $3m |
XLBI in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, XLBI paid 14.5% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 6.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +8.8%. Materials (XLB) returned +12.0% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 3.2 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 11.5%, paid monthly.
XLCI in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, XLCI paid 10.9% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 8.8%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +2.2%. Communication services (XLC) returned −5.7% over the same days, so a holder was ahead by 7.9 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 8.1%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, XLBI or XLCI?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, XLBI paid 14.5% of its starting price in cash and XLCI paid 10.9%, so XLBI paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, XLBI or XLCI?
- With every distribution reinvested, XLBI returned +8.8% and XLCI returned +2.2% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so XLBI returned more.
- Which is cheaper, XLBI or XLCI?
- XLBI charges 0.35% a year and XLCI charges 0.35%, so XLBI 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, XLBI against XLCI, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/xlbi-vs-xlci Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.