DRAM
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ETF Comparison
DRAM vs HBMX: A Concentrated Memory Stack, or Memory Stocks?
A head-to-head of Tuttle Capital Concentrated Memory Stack and Roundhill Memory covering universe, cost, and payout.
Updated November 6, 2026
No track record yet. HBMX 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.
HBMX
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  DRAM |  HBMX |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Roundhill Memory ETF | Tuttle Capital Concentrated Memory Stack ETF |
| Issuer | Roundhill Investments | Tuttle Capital Management |
| Last Close | $39.29 as of November 6, 2026 | $16.69 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | — | — |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | — | — |
| Expense ratio | 0.65% | 0.95% |
| AUM | $14.4B | $19.4M |
| Distribution frequency | None | Annual |
| Underlying index | — | Actively managed (no tracked index recorded) |
| Objective | Seeks capital appreciation by investing at least 80% of net assets in the equity securities of memory companies, or in swaps and forward contracts that provide equivalent exposure. | HBMX is an actively managed, concentrated ETF seeking long-term capital appreciation through focused exposure to the memory semiconductor ecosystem — DRAM, NAND, and high-bandwidth memory (HBM) producers plus the advanced packaging, testing, and equipment companies behind AI infrastructure. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 04/02/2026 | 06/02/2026 |
| Beta | 4.1626 | — |
— Distribution rate, Safety-Adjusted Yield, last dividend, and ex-dividend date are not yet available because HBMX 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.
DRAM has outpaced HBMX over the year to date, posting a 33.32% total return against -41.43%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | Since Jun 2026 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DRAM | 33.32% | -46.80% | 92.5% | -1.62 | -2.05 | -54.2% |
| HBMX | -41.43% | -41.43% | 75.7% | -1.69 | -2.12 | -49.9% |
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 2, 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
DRAM (Roundhill Memory ETF) has no distribution rate on file and its distribution frequency is None. DRAM 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: HBMX 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. What is already clear from the numbers above: the two do not cost the same — DRAM charges 0.65% against 0.95% for HBMX, and on funds tracking the same thing that gap compounds every year you hold.
Memory stocks versus a concentrated memory stack
DRAM holds memory companies. HBMX concentrates the memory stack, including packaging and equipment. Universe is the split.
| DRAM | HBMX | |
|---|---|---|
| Universe | Memory companies | Memory stack, including equipment |
| Expense ratio | 0.65% | 0.95% |
| Distribution rate | — | — |
| Fund size | $14.4B | $19.4M |
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
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 DRAM.
ETFs19
Total AUM$1.26B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Tuttle Capital Management is known for creating specialized, thematic, and income-focused ETFs that often target niche market segments and unconventional investment themes. The issuer's fund lineup spans income strategies, covered call approaches, and thematic investments covering areas ranging from technology and entertainment to alternative sectors, with tickers like SARK (targeting short positions in ark funds) and MEMY (focused on meme stocks) reflecting their emphasis on distinctive market angles. The firm distinguishes itself through a diversified portfolio of tactical and thematic offerings that appeal to investors seeking exposure beyond traditional market categories.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on HBMX.
Quick verdict
DRAM (Roundhill Memory ETF) and HBMX (Tuttle Capital Concentrated Memory Stack ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.
DRAM is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.65% compared to 0.95%.
DRAM has $14.4B in assets vs $19.4M for HBMX, but HBMX 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.
1 shared position
DRAM 4.3% of its top-10 weight
HBMX 4.3% of its top-10 weight
| Position | DRAM | HBMX |
|---|---|---|
| SNDK Sandisk Corp |
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at current distribution rates, DRAM has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available, while HBMX has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available.
DRAM yield—
HBMX yield—
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, DRAM would cost approximately $650 in fees vs $950 for HBMX (simplified, not compounded). The $300.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
DRAM ER0.65%
HBMX ER0.95%
Strategy & risk
DRAM is an ETF built around a thematic strategy, while HBMX is an actively managed ETF built around a thematic strategy.
DRAM beta4.1626
HBMX beta—
Fund details
DRAM is managed by Roundhill Investments (launched 04/02/2026) with $14.4B in assets. HBMX is managed by Tuttle Capital Management (launched 06/02/2026) with $19.4M in assets.
DRAM AUM$14.4B
HBMX AUM$19.4M
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between HBMX and DRAM?
HBMX (Tuttle Capital Concentrated Memory Stack ETF) concentrates the memory stack, including packaging and equipment. DRAM (Roundhill Memory ETF) holds memory companies. Cost is 0.65% versus 0.95%. Distributions are — and — as of November 2026. Universe, not a one-date yield, is the split.
Which of DRAM or HBMX pays more dividend income?
Neither DRAM nor HBMX 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 DRAM and HBMX?
DRAM (Roundhill Memory ETF) is an ETF built around a thematic strategy, while HBMX (Tuttle Capital Concentrated Memory Stack ETF) is an actively managed ETF built around a thematic strategy. They are issued by Roundhill Investments and Tuttle Capital Management respectively.
Can I hold both DRAM and HBMX?
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.
Which has lower fees, DRAM or HBMX?
DRAM has an expense ratio of 0.65% while HBMX charges 0.95%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in DRAM vs HBMX generate?
At current distribution rates, DRAM does not pay distributions, so there is no cash income to estimate. HBMX has not established a distribution history yet, so a cash estimate is not available.
Which has performed better historically, DRAM or HBMX?
DRAM has outpaced HBMX over the year to date, posting a 33.32% total return against -41.43%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare DRAM with
People also compare HBMX with
Popular comparisons
DRAM vs HBMX — 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
DRAM and HBMX are both thematic equity ETFs targeting the memory semiconductor ecosystem that powers AI infrastructure. DRAM uses a passive, broad-based approach with at least 80% exposure to memory companies and derivatives, while HBMX is actively managed and concentrates on a narrower set of holdings across DRAM, NAND, high-bandwidth memory producers, and their adjacent supply chain (advanced packaging, testing, equipment). The key distinction is breadth versus concentration: DRAM casts a wider net at lower cost, while HBMX applies active stock selection and tighter focus on what its managers view as the core memory ecosystem.
How they differ
HBMX's active management and concentrated portfolio strategy stands as the primary structural difference. DRAM holds at least 80% of net assets in memory company equities and derivatives, following a systematic rule; HBMX selects from a smaller universe of issuers across the memory supply chain, including equipment and testing companies.
On fees, DRAM charges 0.65%, while HBMX charges 0.95%, a 30-basis-point gap. DRAM's vastly larger asset base of $14.4B versus $19.4M reflects meaningfully different investor adoption and market presence. DRAM's beta of 4.1626 shows substantially higher sensitivity to broad stock market swings than typical equity funds, reflecting the concentrated cyclicality of memory semiconductors. Both distribute annually or less frequently, so neither is geared toward regular income.
Who each is best for
DRAM: Fits investors seeking straightforward, rules-based exposure to the memory semiconductor trade without active manager oversight, and who can tolerate the high market sensitivity that comes with a thematic single-sector play.
HBMX: Fits investors drawn to active managers' ability to identify differentiated opportunities within the memory ecosystem and who are comfortable with a smaller fund's research-driven positioning and potential for more tactical allocation shifts. A concentrated thematic bet on memory semiconductors amplifies broad equity volatility significantly.
- Concentration and cyclicality. Both funds are tethered to the memory chip cycle, which is capital-intensive, highly competitive, and driven by commodity pricing, customer concentration, and geopolitical supply chain shifts. A cyclical downturn or oversupply in DRAM, NAND, or HBM would compress earnings and multiples industry-wide.
- Active management risk in a smaller fund. HBMX's $19.4M in AUM creates exposure to manager stock-picking decisions across a concentrated portfolio. Concentrated positioning amplifies both the upside of correct calls and the downside of missteps.
- Derivative and swap exposure. DRAM explicitly uses swaps and forward contracts to gain memory company exposure. These derivatives carry counterparty credit risk and reset or rebalancing costs that can drag on returns, particularly in fast-moving or stressed markets.
Bottom line
If you value simplicity and lower fees in a thematic memory play, DRAM's passive approach and 0.65% expense ratio offer broad sector access at lower cost. If you believe concentrated active selection can outperform within memory semiconductors, HBMX's focused thesis and manager discretion present a different profile—though the fund's smaller size and the active bet's track record merit scrutiny. Both carry material single-sector and market-sensitivity risk; 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.