ARKX
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ETF Comparison
ARKX vs GALX vs ROKT vs UFO: Which Fits Each Goal in 2026?
A side-by-side comparison of ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF, VistaShares Space Supercycle® ETF, SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF and Procure Space ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 6, 2026
No track record yet. GALX launched within the last six months. The forward distribution rate is left blank until a payout is published.
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Price and total return
Compare the same available dates. Add a ticker or benchmark below; these controls change the chart only. The snapshot and article describe the original comparison.
Interactive history loads here. The snapshot and period returns remain available when chart history cannot be loaded.
Distribution Safety Score
An estimate of distribution reliability, not price or principal safety, a probability, or a guarantee. Score methodology.
GALX
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ROKT
Caution
High confidence
UFO
Caution
Limited data
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  ARKX |  GALX |  ROKT |  UFO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full name | ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF | VistaShares Space Supercycle® ETF | SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF | Procure Space ETF |
| Issuer | ARK Invest | VistaShares | State Street | Procure |
| Underlying index | Actively managed (no tracked index recorded) | Global space-economy value chain | S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index | S-Network Space Index |
| Last Close | $28.42 as of November 6, 2026 | $19.89 as of November 6, 2026 | $96.55 as of November 6, 2026 | $39.01 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | — | — | 0.21% | 0.04% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | — | — | 0.22% | 0.39% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | — | — | 55 | 40 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | — | — | 0.12% | 0.02% |
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.75% | 0.45% | 0.75% |
| AUM | $686M | $2.71M | $150M | $457M |
| Distribution frequency | None | Annual | Quarterly | Quarterly |
| Objective | Actively managed ETF focused on space exploration and innovation companies. | The VistaShares Space Supercycle® ETF seeks long-term capital appreciation by actively investing in a global portfolio of companies that build, launch, operate, and enable the space economy, from launch systems and satellite infrastructure to communications and enabling technologies. | Tracks the S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index, providing exposure to companies driving innovation in deep space and deep sea frontiers. | Tracks the S-Network Space Index, providing exposure to companies that derive significant revenue from space-related business activities. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 03/30/2021 | 07/15/2026 | 10/19/2018 | 04/10/2019 |
| Beta | 1.73 | — | 1.49 | 1.87 |
| Last dividend | — | — | $0.051 | $0.004 |
| Ex-dividend date | — | — | 09/21/2026 | 09/29/2026 |
— Distribution rate, Safety-Adjusted Yield, last dividend, and ex-dividend date are not yet available because GALX launched July 2026; these fields will populate after the first distribution.
Total returns
100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.
ROKT tops the group over the year to date with a 9.76% total return, against ARKX at -6.68%, GALX at -19.34% and UFO at -3.60%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | Since Jul 2026 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARKX | -6.68% | -12.11% | 28.9% | -1.57 | -2.00 | -22.4% |
| GALX | -19.34% | -19.34% | 34.6% | -2.10 | -2.58 | -28.5% |
| ROKT | 9.76% | -12.99% | 26.9% | -1.80 | -2.17 | -24.0% |
| UFO | -3.60% | -14.80% | 29.2% | -1.89 | -2.44 | -23.8% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of November 5, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Jul 2026” measures every fund from July 16, 2026 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the shared window since Jul 2026. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the shared window since Jul 2026) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Not a distribution payer
ARKX (ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF) has no distribution rate on file and its distribution frequency is None. ARKX is not a payer. The blank yield is not a zero yield.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs14
Total AUM$15.5B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
ARK Invest is known for actively managed ETFs focused on disruptive innovation and emerging technologies across digital assets and innovation themes. ARK's funds are characterized by concentrated portfolios of high-conviction stock picks and a research-driven approach to identifying companies positioned to benefit from technological transformation.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on ARKX.
ETFs13
Total AUM$2.34B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
The firm's fund portfolio, featuring tickers such as ACKY, POW, and QUSA, emphasizes sector-specific and alternative investment themes rather than conventional dividend or income-focused approaches. VistaShares serves investors looking for differentiated exposure to emerging trends and niche market segments through a compact but specialized ETF offering.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on GALX.
ETFs186
Total AUM$2.15T
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Their 88-fund lineup spans diverse strategies including sector exposure (Select Sector SPDR), income generation (Income and Select Sector SPDR Premium Income families), commodities (including the widely-held GLD gold ETF), bonds, ESG-focused investments, and thematic allocations, with popular tickers like DIA (Diamonds Trust), FEZ (Eurozone exposure), and JNK (high-yield bonds) among their most recognized funds. The issuer is characterized by its comprehensive coverage across multiple market segments and its emphasis on both traditional index-based products and specialized strategies like covered call income funds and factor-based investing.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on ROKT.
ETFs1
Total AUM$457M
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Procure is known for offering thematic ETFs that target specific investment trends and sectors. This niche approach allows investors seeking targeted exposure to particular market themes rather than broad-based diversification.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on UFO.
Quick verdict
ARKX (ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF), GALX (VistaShares Space Supercycle® ETF), ROKT (SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF), UFO (Procure Space ETF) are ETFs that take different approaches.
UFO has paid the highest yield over the past 12 months at 0.39%, followed by ROKT at 0.22%. We compare trailing 12-month yields here because UFO's latest distribution annualizes to 0.04% against 0.39% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income.
ROKT is the cheapest with an expense ratio of 0.45%, compared to 0.75% for ARKX and 0.75% for GALX and 0.75% for UFO.
ARKX has the most assets at $686M, but GALX only launched recently — AUM comparisons will become more meaningful as they build a track record.
Top-holdings overlap
Positions that appear in every fund's top 10. Issuers disclose only the largest weights, so this captures the overlap of the concentrated end of each book — not the full portfolios.
— shared positions
ARKX 0.0% of its top-10 weight
GALX top-10 holdings unavailable
ROKT 0.0% of its top-10 weight
UFO 0.0% of its top-10 weight
Top-10 holdings unavailable for GALX — cannot compute overlap.
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at the rates paid over the past 12 months, ARKX pays no distribution (not a payer; a blank rate is not a zero yield); GALX has no reported yield yet; ROKT would pay about $22.00 a year (about $5.50 per quarterly distribution on average); UFO would pay about $39.00 a year (about $9.75 per quarterly distribution on average).
ARKX yield—
GALX yield—
ROKT 12-month yield0.22%
UFO 12-month yield0.39%
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000: ARKX costs ~$750, GALX costs ~$750, ROKT costs ~$450, UFO costs ~$750 in fees (simplified, not compounded).
ARKX ER0.75%
GALX ER0.75%
ROKT ER0.45%
UFO ER0.75%
Strategy & risk
ARKX is an actively managed ETF; GALX tracks Global space-economy value chain with an industrials approach; ROKT tracks S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index; UFO tracks S-Network Space Index.
ARKX beta1.73
GALX beta—
ROKT beta1.49
UFO beta1.87
Fund details
ARKX is managed by ARK Invest (launched 03/30/2021) with $686M in assets. GALX is managed by VistaShares (launched 07/15/2026) with $2.71M in assets. ROKT is managed by State Street (launched 10/19/2018) with $150M in assets. UFO is managed by Procure (launched 04/10/2019) with $457M in assets.
ARKX AUM$686M
GALX AUM$2.71M
ROKT AUM$150M
UFO AUM$457M
Frequently asked questions
Which of ARKX, GALX, ROKT, and UFO is best for dividend income?
It depends on your goals. UFO has paid the highest trailing 12-month yield (0.39%). We compare trailing 12-month yields here because UFO's latest distribution annualizes to 0.04% against 0.39% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility, and ARKX is not a payer, so a blank yield is not a zero yield. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.
What is the difference between ARKX, GALX, ROKT, and UFO?
ARKX (ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF) is an actively managed ETF, issued by ARK Invest. GALX (VistaShares Space Supercycle® ETF) tracks Global space-economy value chain with an industrials approach, issued by VistaShares. ROKT (SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF) tracks S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index, issued by State Street. UFO (Procure Space ETF) tracks S-Network Space Index, issued by Procure.
Can I hold ARKX, GALX, ROKT, and UFO together?
Yes — nothing prevents holding them together. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.
Which of ARKX, GALX, ROKT and UFO is safest?
By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — ROKT scores 55, UFO scores 40, so ROKT's payout currently looks the more resilient of the group. ROKT has also been less sensitive to market moves (beta 1.49 vs 1.87 for UFO). No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.
Which has the lowest fees among ARKX, GALX, ROKT, and UFO?
ARKX has an expense ratio of 0.75%, GALX has an expense ratio of 0.75%, ROKT has an expense ratio of 0.45%, UFO has an expense ratio of 0.75%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 generate in each?
At the rates paid over the past 12 months, $10,000 in ARKX has no distribution to estimate, because ARKX is not a payer and a blank rate is not a zero yield. $10,000 in GALX has no reported cash yet. $10,000 in ROKT would pay about $22.00 a year (about $5.50 per quarterly distribution on average). $10,000 in UFO would pay about $39.00 a year (about $9.75 per quarterly distribution on average).
More comparisons to explore
People also compare ARKX with
People also compare GALX with
Popular comparisons
ARKX vs GALX vs ROKT vs UFO — at a glance
Generated November 1, 2026.
Figures quoted in this analysis are from its generation date and may lag the live snapshot table above, which always shows the latest data.
Overview
These four ETFs track the space economy, but diverge sharply on strategy and maturity. ARKX and GALX are actively managed; ROKT and UFO track passive indexes. ROKT targets deep space and deep-sea innovation across a broader frontier mandate, whereas ARKX, GALX, and UFO focus specifically on space-economy revenue streams.
How they differ
The biggest split is active versus passive. ARKX and GALX employ portfolio managers picking space-economy stocks; ROKT and UFO hold index baskets with minimal discretion. ARKX has been running 5 years and manages $686M—more than triple GALX's tiny $2.71M base—while GALX only began trading 3 months.
On fees, ROKT stands apart at 0.45%, making it the cheapest option. ARKX, GALX, and UFO all charge 0.75%. None of these funds pay material yields; ROKT yields 0.21%, UFO yields 0.04%, and ARKX and GALX report no distributions. Beta tells a story about volatility: UFO has the highest market sensitivity at 1.87, ARKX trails at 1.73, and ROKT sits in the middle at 1.49.
Who each is best for
- ARKX: Fits investors comfortable with active stock-picking in a speculative, emerging theme and who trust ARK's research process; size and tenure offer some confidence in liquidity and operational stability.
- ROKT: Suits investors seeking broad innovation exposure beyond space alone—the Final Frontiers mandate includes deep-sea technology—and who want the lowest fees and an indexed approach rather than manager discretion.
- UFO: Fits investors targeting pure space-economy revenue exposure through a passive index at a moderate asset base, accepting higher beta volatility in exchange for a straightforward, non-discretionary mandate.
Key risks to know
- Emerging-sector concentration: All four funds bet on the space economy as a growth theme with no guarantee that commercial adoption, government contracts, or profitability will materialize as priced in. Revenue concentration among a small number of providers (SpaceX, Blue Origin, Relativity, Axiom) creates single-issuer or single-customer risk.
- High beta and drawdown risk: UFO's 1.87 and ARKX's 1.73 signal sensitivity to equity-market downturns and tech-sector volatility. A broad market correction could amplify losses in these thematic holdings. ROKT's $150M is also modest.
- Active management risk (ARKX and GALX): Active pickers must identify winning space companies before growth becomes consensus; poor stock selection, sector rotation, or manager departures can lag index-based peers. ARKX's 5 years tenure provides some track record; GALX has none.
- Index composition drift: ROKT's deep-sea inclusion and UFO's pure-space focus mean their holdings diverge; neither is certain to capture the most profitable segments of the eventual space economy.
Bottom line
If you want established scale and active management, ARKX offers the largest base and longest history. If you prefer passive indexing and the lowest cost, ROKT at 0.45% is the cheapest. GALX appeals only to early-stage thematic believers willing to trade liquidity and uncertainty for early entry. UFO splits the difference—passive, moderate AUM, higher beta—but at a 0.75% fee tied to ARKX's active offering. Past performance does not predict future returns, and the space economy remains speculative.
AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.
Learn the method
The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.
These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.