FEPI vs YMAG vs YMAX: Which Fits Each Goal in 2026?

Overview

FEPI, YMAG, and YMAX are all equity ETFs that generate income through covered call strategies on tech-heavy baskets, but they differ sharply in scope and yield. The three trade at vastly different distribution rates—24.85%, 30.80%, and 39.53%, respectively—reflecting different underlying equity exposures and call-selling intensity.

How they differ

The biggest difference is breadth and concentration. Second, yield and NAV erosion risk scale dramatically across the three. YMAX's 39.53% yield is nearly 60% higher than FEPI's 24.85%, and roughly 28 percentage points higher than YMAG's 30.80%. Third, fees differ: FEPI charges 0.65%, while both YMAG and YMAX run around 1.34% and 1.33%, respectively—a fund-of-funds tax that adds cost to the already-complex options machinery. Beta also reflects different leverage and concentration: YMAX's 1.5515 is notably higher than FEPI's 1.1684 and YMAG's 1.1624, signaling greater equity downside sensitivity.

Who each is best for

• FEPI: Fits investors seeking weekly covered-call income from a professionally managed tech-growth basket who can tolerate high yields without expecting unlimited capital preservation; prefer a single-layer structure over fund-of-funds complexity.

• YMAG: Fits investors with strong conviction in the Magnificent 7 stocks and who want concentrated exposure to that specific group while harvesting options premium; willing to accept high yield concentration risk in exchange for pure Mag 7 beta.

• YMAX: Fits investors chasing maximum weekly income across the broadest tech option-income lineup and who can tolerate the highest volatility and steepest NAV erosion risk in exchange for the highest current distribution rate. When underlying equity returns lag distributions, NAV compresses over time. FEPI at 24.85% also faces this pressure, though less acutely.

• Magnificent 7 concentration (YMAG). Locking exposure to only seven stocks removes diversification benefits within tech; a sector rotation or single-stock weakness (Tesla, Nvidia) can hit YMAG harder than FEPI's broader basket or YMAX's multistock approach.

• Fund-of-funds fee drag and complexity (YMAG, YMAX). Both YieldMax funds layer an extra fee tier and pass through the expense ratios of underlying option income ETFs, compounding total cost; this structure also makes tracking true net premium and call moneyness difficult for the investor.

• Call-writing risk across market regimes. All three sell calls to generate income, which caps upside during sharp tech rallies. In a market where mega-cap tech accelerates beyond strike prices, covered-call funds consistently underperform the underlying equity in percentage terms.

• Beta and volatility mismatch (YMAX). YMAX's beta of 1.5515 is materially higher than its peers, indicating the fund will likely swing harder on down days; combined with its extreme yield, this creates a scenario where distributions may look generous during calm periods but income becomes unsustainable if equity volatility spikes.

Bottom line

If you want covered-call income with lower yield and a simpler single-ETF structure, FEPI's 24.85% and active management appeal; if you have a specific thesis on the Magnificent 7 and want pure exposure to those stocks, YMAG's concentrated basket aligns that conviction with options premium; if maximum current income is the primary goal and you can accept the highest NAV erosion and volatility risk, YMAX's 39.53% yield reflects that tradeoff. Past performance and historical yields do not predict future distributions—option premiums and underlying equity returns will evolve, and all three funds' published yields can compress substantially if market conditions change.