BOTZ
Generally safe
Limited data
ETF Comparison
BOTZ vs CHAT: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence ETF and Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 6, 2026
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Best for
- BOTZInvestors who want higher current income (0.57% paid over the past 12 months while CHAT makes no distribution).
- CHATInvestors who want targeted technology exposure and accept its concentration.
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.
CHAT
Unproven
Limited data
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  BOTZ |  CHAT |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence ETF | Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF |
| Issuer | Global X | Roundhill Investments |
| Last Close | $31.05 as of November 6, 2026 | $67.56 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | 0.12% | — |
| Trailing 12-month yield | 0.57% | 2.49% |
| 30-day SEC yield | -0.01% | — |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | 64 | 50 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | 0.08% | — |
| Expense ratio | 0.68% | 0.75% |
| AUM | $3.02B | $1.39B |
| Distribution frequency | Semi-Annual | Annual |
| Underlying index | Indxx Global Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic Index | Actively managed (no tracked index recorded) |
| Objective | Provide exposure to companies that potentially stand to benefit from increased adoption and utilization of robotics and artificial intelligence. | Actively managed ETF investing in companies positioned to benefit from generative artificial intelligence and related technologies, spanning large-language-model platforms, semiconductor and IT-hardware infrastructure, and enterprise and consumer generative-AI software. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 09/12/2016 | 05/18/2023 |
| Beta | 1.84 | 2.02 |
| Last dividend | $0.018 | $1.68 |
| Ex-dividend date | 06/29/2026 | 12/29/2025 |
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.
BOTZ has lagged CHAT over the trailing twelve months, posting a -16.79% total return against 3.80%. The lead holds up over 3 years too: CHAT has compounded at 34.33% a year, against 8.11% for BOTZ. BOTZ has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 25.6% against 34.9% for CHAT. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | 1Y cumulative | 3Y annualized | Since May 2023 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOTZ | -15.39% | -16.79% | 8.11% | 4.67% | 25.6% | 0.15 | 0.21 | -29.0% |
| CHAT | 10.75% | 3.80% | 34.33% | 31.59% | 34.9% | 0.73 | 1.01 | -37.3% |
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 May 2023” measures every fund from May 18, 2023 — 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 trailing 3 years. 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 trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Distribution rate and SEC yield
| Metric | BOTZ | CHAT |
|---|---|---|
| Forward distribution rate | 0.12% | — |
| Trailing 12-month yield | 0.57% | 2.49% |
| 30-day SEC yield | -0.01% | — |
Total return (price change plus reinvested distributions) is the Total returns section above. A 30-day SEC yield can sit far from the headline distribution rate; both numbers are the fund's own published fields.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Bottom lineChoose BOTZ if you want higher current income (0.57% paid over the past 12 months while CHAT makes no distribution). Choose CHAT if you want targeted technology exposure and accept its concentration.
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs116
Total AUM$89.1B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Global X is known for offering a diverse lineup of thematic and income-focused ETFs that cater to both traditional and alternative investment strategies. Their fund families span income generation through covered call strategies and SuperDividend funds, alongside thematic exposure in areas like digital assets, robotics, and emerging markets, complemented by bond and commodities offerings. The issuer provides broad coverage across sector-specific, risk-managed, and growth-oriented strategies, making their lineup particularly notable for investors seeking specialized exposure beyond conventional equity and fixed-income categories.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on BOTZ.
ETFs57
Total AUM$25.4B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Roundhill Investments is known for offering innovative, specialized ETFs that often feature weekly dividend distributions and exposure to trending themes and individual mega-cap stocks. Their lineup spans income-focused strategies, leveraged products, thematic investments in areas like cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence, and weekly-pay funds that appeal to investors seeking frequent distributions. The issuer has built a distinctive niche with products targeting both traditional income seekers and those interested in emerging sectors, offering a diverse range of tickers that go well beyond conventional dividend vehicles.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on CHAT.
Quick verdict
BOTZ (Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence ETF) and CHAT (Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.
BOTZ has paid a 0.57% yield over the past 12 months. CHAT has not yet established a full distribution history, so a comparable yield figure is not available.
BOTZ is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.68% compared to 0.75%.
BOTZ is the larger fund by assets ($3.02B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
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.
1 shared position
BOTZ 7.9% of its top-10 weight
CHAT 7.4% of its top-10 weight
| Position | BOTZ | CHAT |
|---|---|---|
| NVDA NVIDIA Corporation |
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at the rates paid over the past 12 months, BOTZ would pay about $57.00 a year (about $28.50 per semiannual distribution on average), while CHAT has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available.
BOTZ 12-month yield0.57%
CHAT yield—
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, BOTZ would cost approximately $680 in fees vs $750 for CHAT (simplified, not compounded). The $70.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
BOTZ ER0.68%
CHAT ER0.75%
Strategy & risk
BOTZ tracks Indxx Global Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic Index with a technology approach, while CHAT is an actively managed ETF built around technology exposure. Beta is 1.84 for BOTZ and 2.02 for CHAT, making BOTZ the less sensitive to market moves of the two by this measure.
BOTZ beta1.84
CHAT beta2.02
Fund details
BOTZ is managed by Global X (launched 09/12/2016) with $3.02B in assets. CHAT is managed by Roundhill Investments (launched 05/18/2023) with $1.39B in assets.
BOTZ AUM$3.02B
CHAT AUM$1.39B
Frequently asked questions
Which of BOTZ or CHAT pays more dividend income?
BOTZ currently reports a distribution yield, while CHAT has not yet established a full distribution history. A direct income comparison is not yet meaningful — check back once both funds have published several consecutive distributions.
What is the difference between BOTZ and CHAT?
BOTZ (Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence ETF) tracks Indxx Global Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic Index with a technology approach, while CHAT (Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF) is an actively managed ETF built around technology exposure. They are issued by Global X and Roundhill Investments respectively.
Can I hold both BOTZ and CHAT?
Yes. Their disclosed top-10 holdings share only 1 position, so combining both adds mostly distinct underlying names — see the holdings-overlap section above. Overlap outside the disclosed top 10 can still exist.
Is BOTZ or CHAT safer?
By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — BOTZ scores 64, CHAT scores 50, so BOTZ's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. BOTZ has also been less sensitive to market moves (beta 1.84 vs 2.02 for CHAT). No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.
Which has lower fees, BOTZ or CHAT?
BOTZ has an expense ratio of 0.68% while CHAT charges 0.75%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in BOTZ vs CHAT generate?
At the rates paid over the past 12 months, $10,000 in BOTZ would pay about $57.00 a year (about $28.50 per semiannual distribution on average). CHAT has not established a distribution history yet, so a cash estimate is not available.
Which has performed better historically, BOTZ or CHAT?
BOTZ has lagged CHAT over the trailing twelve months, posting a -16.79% total return against 3.80%. The lead holds up over 3 years too: CHAT has compounded at 34.33% a year, against 8.11% for BOTZ. BOTZ has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 25.6% against 34.9% for CHAT. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare BOTZ with
People also compare CHAT with
Popular comparisons
BOTZ vs CHAT — at a glance
Generated October 31, 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
BOTZ and CHAT are both technology-focused ETFs built around artificial intelligence, but they differ fundamentally in approach and scope. BOTZ tracks a thematic index of robotics and AI adoption across industries using a passive strategy, while CHAT is an actively managed fund concentrating on generative AI specifically—large-language models, semiconductor infrastructure, and AI software. The key distinction is BOTZ's broader robotics-plus-AI mandate versus CHAT's narrower bet on the generative AI wave.
How they differ
BOTZ uses index-tracking to capture the wider robotics and AI ecosystem, whereas CHAT's active management focuses portfolio construction on generative AI beneficiaries. The biggest gap lies in their scope: BOTZ holds companies across multiple AI and robotics applications, while CHAT targets generative AI platforms and their supporting hardware and software stack specifically.
On fees, CHAT's 0.75% expense ratio is 7 basis points higher than BOTZ's 0.68%, a material difference over time. BOTZ holds a larger asset base at $3.02B versus CHAT's $1.39B.
Who each is best for
BOTZ: Fits investors seeking diversified exposure to the robotics and automation themes alongside AI, with a preference for passive index-based management and lower fees. The modest 0.12% yield suits growth-oriented portfolios where capital appreciation, not income, is the primary driver.
CHAT: Designed for investors with conviction in generative AI's near-term dominance who prefer active stock selection and are comfortable with concentrated sector bets and higher market beta. The lack of a reported distribution rate signals this fund prioritizes capital gains over current income.
Key risks to know
- Thematic concentration: Both funds concentrate holdings in technology and AI-related businesses. Their performance hinges on sustained adoption and spending on AI and robotics; a pullback in corporate or consumer investment in these technologies could pressure valuations sharply. Verify their top-10 holdings overlap to gauge true diversification.
- High market sensitivity: CHAT's 2.02 beta and BOTZ's 1.84 beta mean both amplify broad market declines. A 20% stock market correction could translate to roughly 36–40% losses in these funds, making them unsuitable for conservative or near-term time horizons.
- Generative AI hype risk specific to CHAT: CHAT's active management explicitly targets generative AI, a theme experiencing intense investor interest and potential overvaluation. The fund risks overpaying for AI-adjacent companies or holding winners that disappoint once the novelty fades or competition intensifies.
- Index methodology risk in BOTZ: BOTZ depends on how the Indxx Global Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic Index defines and weights robotics and AI exposure. Index changes or inclusion criteria shifts could alter returns unexpectedly.
- Active management opacity in CHAT: CHAT's active approach means holdings and weightings can shift without index constraints, adding idiosyncratic risk if manager bets diverge from actual generative AI adoption patterns.
Bottom line
If you want broad robotics-and-AI exposure with lower fees and a passive approach, BOTZ's index strategy and 1621419730 larger asset base stand out. If you believe generative AI is the dominant AI narrative and accept higher fees, concentrated holdings, and elevated market beta in exchange for active manager selection, CHAT offers that targeted bet. Both carry meaningful concentration and market-sensitivity risks; past performance does not guarantee future results.
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.