ARKX
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ETF Comparison
ARKX vs XSPC: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF and VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 6, 2026
No track record yet. XSPC 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.
XSPC
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  ARKX |  XSPC |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF | VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF |
| Issuer | ARK Invest | VegaShares |
| Last Close | $28.42 as of November 6, 2026 | $16.79 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | — | — |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | — | — |
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.75% |
| AUM | $686M | $1.75M |
| Distribution frequency | None | None |
| Underlying index | Actively managed (no tracked index recorded) | — |
| Objective | Actively managed ETF focused on space exploration and innovation companies. | Provide exposure to the fund's underlying index or strategy per issuer materials. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 03/30/2021 | 06/15/2026 |
| Beta | 1.73 | — |
— Distribution rate, Safety-Adjusted Yield, last dividend, and ex-dividend date are not yet available because XSPC launched June 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.
ARKX has outpaced XSPC over the year to date, posting a -6.68% total return against -39.49%. ARKX has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 29.3% against 53.4% for XSPC. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | Since Jun 2026 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARKX | -6.68% | -22.17% | 29.3% | -2.32 | -2.90 | -22.4% |
| XSPC | -39.49% | -39.49% | 53.4% | -2.50 | -3.13 | -39.5% |
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 Jun 2026” measures every fund from June 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 Jun 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 Jun 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. XSPC (VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF) has no distribution rate on file and its distribution frequency is None. XSPC 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.
Bottom lineWe won't call this one: XSPC launched June 2026, so there is not yet a track record to compare. Compare the strategy, cost and holdings in the sections above and treat any performance figures for the newer ETF as provisional.
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.
ETFs7
Total AUM$79.0M
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
VegaShares specializes in options-based and thematic ETFs designed to generate income and capitalize on emerging trends. The issuer's lineup spans income-focused strategies, including covered call funds, alongside thematic offerings that target specific market segments and innovation themes. VegaShares serves investors seeking alternative approaches to traditional equity exposure, with a concentrated portfolio of strategically named funds addressing both income generation and sector-specific growth opportunities.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on XSPC.
Quick verdict
ARKX (ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF) and XSPC (VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.
ARKX has $686M in assets vs $1.75M for XSPC, but XSPC only launched June 2026 — AUM comparisons will become more meaningful as it builds 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.
5 shared positions
ARKX 31.6% of its top-10 weight
XSPC 43.8% of its top-10 weight
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at current distribution rates, ARKX has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available, while XSPC has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available.
ARKX yield—
XSPC yield—
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, ARKX would cost approximately $750 in fees vs $750 for XSPC (simplified, not compounded). Both charge the same expense ratio.
ARKX ER0.75%
XSPC ER0.75%
Strategy & risk
ARKX is an actively managed ETF, while XSPC is an ETF built around a thematic strategy.
ARKX beta1.73
XSPC beta—
Fund details
ARKX is managed by ARK Invest (launched 03/30/2021) with $686M in assets. XSPC is managed by VegaShares (launched 06/15/2026) with $1.75M in assets.
ARKX AUM$686M
XSPC AUM$1.75M
Frequently asked questions
Which of ARKX or XSPC pays more dividend income?
Neither ARKX nor XSPC currently reports a distribution yield, so neither is an income fund today. Compare them on holdings, cost, and total return instead.
What is the difference between ARKX and XSPC?
ARKX (ARK Space Exploration & Innovation ETF) is an actively managed ETF, while XSPC (VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF) is an ETF built around a thematic strategy. They are issued by ARK Invest and VegaShares respectively.
Can I hold both ARKX and XSPC?
You can, but expect meaningful overlap: 5 of the disclosed top-10 positions are shared (see the holdings-overlap section above). Holding both may double up on the same underlying names rather than diversify.
Which has lower fees, ARKX or XSPC?
ARKX and XSPC both charge the same expense ratio of 0.75%, so neither is cheaper on fees — pick based on yield, strategy, or underlying index instead.
How much income does $10,000 in ARKX vs XSPC generate?
At current distribution rates, ARKX does not pay distributions, so there is no cash income to estimate. XSPC does not pay distributions, so there is no cash income to estimate.
Which has performed better historically, ARKX or XSPC?
ARKX has outpaced XSPC over the year to date, posting a -6.68% total return against -39.49%. ARKX has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 29.3% against 53.4% for XSPC. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare ARKX with
People also compare XSPC with
Popular comparisons
ARKX vs XSPC — at a glance
Generated October 24, 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
ARKX and XSPC are both equity ETFs focused on space exploration and related innovation. Both charge the same 0.75% expense ratio but serve different investor profiles based on management style and fund maturity.
How they differ
ARKX is an actively managed fund where ARK's portfolio team selects holdings, while XSPC appears to track a passive index or rules-based strategy. This is the fundamental distinction in how returns are generated and how closely either fund will track the broader space sector.
The second major difference is track record and asset base. ARKX has been operating since 03/30/2021 with $686M in assets under management, while XSPC launched on 06/15/2026 and holds only $1.75M. The 684145905 gap in AUM reflects differences in investor adoption and fund history.
Neither fund currently distributes dividends, so there's no yield comparison to evaluate. Both carry the same 0.75% fee structure.
Who each is best for
ARKX: Fits investors who want active stock selection within the space sector and prefer a fund with an established operational history and larger asset base. The higher beta signals comfort with meaningful price swings in exchange for what ARK believes is alpha potential.
XSPC: Designed for investors who want systematic, rules-based exposure to space-related companies and are willing to accept a newer, smaller fund structure. May appeal to those skeptical of active management fees or seeking a different methodology within the same thematic space.
Key risks to know
- Sector concentration: Both funds are narrowly focused on space exploration and innovation. A sustained slowdown in commercial space investment, regulatory changes to launch licensing, or delays in major projects could pressure both funds similarly, and their holdings likely overlap significantly.
- Active management vs. passive tracking: ARKX's returns depend on ARK's stock-picking skill relative to the space sector; underperformance versus a broader space index (or versus XSPC itself) would suggest the 0.75% fee isn't justified by alpha. XSPC offers no such active layer but provides no track record to evaluate consistency either. Smaller funds face higher per-share operating costs and may trade at wider bid-ask spreads, raising trading friction for investors.
- High volatility: ARKX's 1.73 beta indicates it may swing 70% wider than the stock market in either direction. For investors with short time horizons or low loss tolerance, this magnified swings may be uncomfortable.
Bottom line
If you value an established active manager with a longer operating history and meaningful AUM, ARKX offers a more proven structure; if you prefer a passive or rules-based approach and are comfortable with a newer fund, XSPC may appeal. Neither offers current income, so both are suited to growth-oriented portfolios. Remember that past performance in the space sector doesn't predict future results, and both funds carry significant concentration risk in an emerging, volatile industry.
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.