DV
Dividend Vision

ETF Comparison

FEPI vs QQQI: A FANG Sleeve, or the Whole Nasdaq-100?

A head-to-head of REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income and NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income covering the book, cost, and cash.

Data updated September 22, 2026

Best for

  • FEPIInvestors who want a covered-call overwrite written on the holdings themselves.
  • QQQIInvestors who want index call spreads structured for Section 1256 tax treatment.

Jump to the side-by-side numbers

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.

Total returns

100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings.

FEPI has lagged QQQI over the trailing twelve months, posting a 17.33% total return against 18.70%. Measured from Jan 2024 — the start of shared available history — QQQI has compounded at 20.51% a year versus 16.56% for FEPI. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Total return and risk statistics by fund. Each row is one fund; each column is one period or statistic.
SymbolYTD1YSince Jan 2024Volatility Sharpe Sortino Max drawdown
FEPI13.90%17.33%16.56%19.7%0.590.83-15.0%
QQQI15.44%18.70%20.51%16.7%0.761.08-9.6%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of September 22, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; windows of one year or longer are annualized. “Since Jan 2024” measures every fund from January 30, 2024 — 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 past year. 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 past year) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.

Side-by-side snapshot

Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric; each column is one fund.
MetricFEPIQQQI
Full nameREX FANG Covered Call ETFNEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
IssuerREX SharesNEOS
Underlying indexBasket (FANG & innovation equities)Nasdaq-100
Last Close$43.52 as of September 22, 2026$55.83 as of September 22, 2026
Distribution rate24.37%13.62%
Distribution Safety Score™ 7684
Safety-Adjusted Yield 18.52%11.44%
Expense ratio0.65%0.68%
AUM$706M$14.8B
Distribution frequencyWeeklyMonthly
ObjectiveTargets income by selling covered calls on an actively managed basket of FANG and innovation focused equities while maintaining growth exposure.Seeks to generate high monthly income in a tax efficient manner while targeting equity appreciation.
Asset classEquityEquity
Inception date10/11/202301/29/2024
Beta1.16841.0553
Last dividend$0.204$0.6339
Ex-dividend date09/16/202609/16/2026

Bottom lineChoose FEPI if you want a covered-call overwrite written on the holdings themselves. Choose QQQI if you want index call spreads structured for Section 1256 tax treatment. FEPI and QQQI both use option or derivative overlays. Their tradeoff is the underlying exposure, how each option strategy is implemented, and the yield each targets; either overlay can limit upside participation, so neither offers uncapped price exposure.

FEPI vs QQQI: FANG overlay or Nasdaq-100 income?

FEPI is a FANG-and-innovation sleeve. QQQI overlays the whole Nasdaq-100. The book underneath is the decision.

FEPIQQQI
What it ownsFANG and innovation names plus overlayNasdaq-100 plus NEOS overlay
Expense ratio0.65%0.68%
Distribution rate24.37%13.62%

How the risk works

Read this before the income numbers below: the strategy mechanics on this page shape what those payouts can cost you.

  • Capped upside and premium dependence. FEPI and QQQI generate income by selling options, which trades away part of a strong rally in exchange for premium. Distributions can include return of capital, and a payout the underlying assets cannot sustain shows up as NAV erosion over time — the big yield number is not free.

Learn the mechanics: Return of capital, explained · NAV erosion, explained

Model this comparison:
Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Income calculator

See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.

REX Shares
ETFs73
Total AUM$16.5B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

REX Shares is known for specializing in options-based and thematic ETF strategies, offering 23 funds organized across distinct families including Covered Call, IncomeMax Option Strategy, and MicroSectors products. The fund lineup emphasizes income generation through option strategies and sector-specific exposure, with holdings spanning technology, commodities, and alternative assets. REX Shares targets investors seeking non-traditional income approaches and concentrated sector bets, positioning itself in a niche segment focused on structured strategies rather than broad market indexing.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on FEPI.

See all REX Shares ETFs
NEOS
ETFs19
Total AUM$34.2B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

NEOS is known for developing specialized income-focused ETFs that employ strategies like covered calls, hedging, and enhanced yields across various asset classes. The firm manages 19 funds organized into nine distinct families, including offerings in equity high income, fixed income enhancement, digital assets, and alternative strategies, with popular tickers like SPYI (S&P 500 covered call), QQQI (Nasdaq-100 covered call), and QQQH (Nasdaq-100 hedged equity income). NEOS distinguishes itself in the ETF landscape through its emphasis on income generation and downside protection strategies rather than traditional growth approaches.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on QQQI.

See all NEOS ETFs

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — free to start, no credit card.

Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Quick verdict

FEPI (REX FANG Covered Call ETF) and QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) are both dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

FEPI offers the higher yield at 24.37% vs 13.62% for QQQI. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

FEPI is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.65% compared to 0.68%.

They have different reference exposures: FEPI is linked to Basket (FANG & innovation equities) while QQQI is linked to Nasdaq-100, which means their performance drivers differ.

QQQI is the larger fund by assets ($14.8B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.

Who should choose each?

Choose FEPI

REX FANG Covered Call ETF

  • Want a covered-call overwrite on the stocks the fund holds.
  • Want to maximize current income — FEPI distributes roughly 24.37% from selling options premium, vs 13.62% for QQQI.
  • Are comfortable with an options-income strategy — a large payout in exchange for capped upside.
  • Want to keep costs low — a 0.65% expense ratio vs 0.68% for QQQI.

Choose QQQI

NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF

  • Want index call spreads structured for Section 1256 tax treatment.
  • Are comfortable with an options-income strategy — a large payout in exchange for capped upside.

Not sure? Use the income calculator and snapshot above to weigh these trade-offs against your own goals.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, FEPI would generate roughly $46.87 cash per distribution, while QQQI would produce $113.50 cash per distribution, at current distribution rates.

FEPI yield24.37%
QQQI yield13.62%
Cash diff on $10K$66.63

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, FEPI would cost approximately $650 in fees vs $680 for QQQI (simplified, not compounded). The $30.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

FEPI ER0.65%
QQQI ER0.68%

Strategy & risk

FEPI is actively managed around Basket (FANG & innovation equities) exposure with a covered call approach, while QQQI is actively managed around Nasdaq-100 exposure with an active approach. Beta is 1.1684 for FEPI and 1.0553 for QQQI, making QQQI the less volatile of the two by this measure.

FEPI beta1.1684
QQQI beta1.0553

Fund details

FEPI is managed by REX Shares (launched 10/11/2023) with $706M in assets. QQQI is managed by NEOS (launched 01/29/2024) with $14.8B in assets.

FEPI AUM$706M
QQQI AUM$14.8B
Ready to act?
Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Enjoyed this page?

Do us a favor — if you found this comparison useful, please share it with a friend researching dividend ETFs.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between FEPI and QQQI?

FEPI (REX FANG Covered Call ETF) writes options on FANG and innovation names. QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) overlays the Nasdaq-100. Cost is 0.65% versus 0.68%; distributions are 24.37% and 13.62% as of September 2026. A FANG sleeve versus the whole Nasdaq-100 is the decision, not which yield is larger on one date.

What is the current distribution rate for FEPI and QQQI?

FEPI currently distributes 24.37% and QQQI 13.62%, based on fund data updated September 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.

Is FEPI or QQQI better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. FEPI currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.

Can I hold both FEPI and QQQI?

Yes — nothing prevents holding both. 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.

Is FEPI or QQQI safer?

By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — QQQI scores 84, FEPI scores 76, so QQQI's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee, and the leverage, options-income, or crypto caveats flagged on this page apply regardless of score.

Which has lower fees, FEPI or QQQI?

FEPI has an expense ratio of 0.65% while QQQI charges 0.68%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in FEPI vs QQQI generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in FEPI would generate roughly $46.87 cash per distribution ($2,437.00 annually). The same in QQQI would produce about $113.50 cash per distribution ($1,362.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, FEPI or QQQI?

FEPI has lagged QQQI over the trailing twelve months, posting a 17.33% total return against 18.70%. Measured from Jan 2024 — the start of shared available history — QQQI has compounded at 20.51% a year versus 16.56% for FEPI. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

More comparisons to explore

FEPI vs QQQI — at a glance

Generated September 19, 2026.

Overview

FEPI and QQQI are both equity ETFs that use covered-call strategies to generate high income from technology and growth stocks. FEPI targets a basket of actively selected FANG and innovation companies with 24.37% annual yield and Weekly distributions. QQQI tracks the Nasdaq-100 index with 13.62% annual yield and Monthly distributions. The key distinction is that FEPI pursues active stock selection with dramatically higher income generation, while QQQI follows a rules-based index approach with lower yield but $14.8B in assets versus FEPI's $706M.

How they differ

FEPI's 24.37% yield is nearly twice QQQI's 13.62%, which reflects aggressive call-selling that caps upside but prioritizes current income. This higher payout comes with elevated NAV erosion risk and a shorter track record—FEPI launched 10/11/2023, making it substantially newer than QQQI's 01/29/2024 inception. Both charge similar fees (FEPI 0.65%, QQQI 0.68%), though QQQI emphasizes tax efficiency in its design.

Who each is best for

FEPI: Fits investors seeking maximum current income from tech and growth stocks who accept that call-overlay strategies may cap substantial market rallies and are comfortable with a newer fund structure still proving its long-term economics.

QQQI: Fits investors who want broad Nasdaq-100 exposure with meaningful income enhancement, prefer established index rules over active selection, and value the combination of deeper AUM, explicit tax-efficiency language, and a longer operating history.

  • Call assignment and upside cap. Both funds sell calls to generate income; in sharp rallies, assigned positions reduce equity participation. FEPI's higher yield suggests tighter strikes, which increases the likelihood of assignment during strength.
  • Concentration and selection risk. FEPI's active basket of FANG and innovation stocks carries sector and manager-selection risk that QQQI mitigates through its 100-stock Nasdaq index. If FEPI's picks underperform, income coverage shrinks.
  • Beta and volatility mismatch. FEPI's 1.1684 beta versus QQQI's 1.0553 suggests FEPI may experience larger price swings, which amplifies the risk that call assignments lock in losses during downturns while still bearing downside.
  • Tracking error and fund maturity. QQQI's longer track record allows investors to observe actual distribution stability and NAV behavior through a full market cycle; FEPI, launched 10/11/2023, has not yet completed a full year, limiting visibility into how the overlay and management adapt to market stress.

Bottom line

If you value maximum income and active management of growth-stock names, FEPI stands out—but accept that its 24.37% yield likely cannot sustain indefinitely without principal erosion. If you prefer a diversified 100-stock index with meaningful yield and a longer operating history, QQQI offers lower yield drag and simpler mechanics. Past performance does not predict future results, and covered-call funds in particular depend heavily on the volatility environment and underlying equity direction.

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.

How covered-call funds work How to read a fund's stats The covered-call opportunity cost

Still deciding? Compare them against your own portfolio

See how each ETF fits alongside your real holdings — forecast future income, analyze overlap, and gauge risk. Start a free 7-day Dividend Vision trial and make the call with your full portfolio in view.

Start Free Open in Comparator Browse Screener