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. 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.
TDAQ tops the group over the trailing twelve months with a 23.81% total return, against GPIQ at 23.08% and QQQI at 18.23%. 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.
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of September 30, 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 Sep 2025” measures every fund from September 4, 2025 — 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.
Distribution rate and SEC yield
Metric
GPIQ
QQQI
TDAQ
Forward distribution rate
10.28%
13.69%
16.83%
Trailing 12-month yield
9.86%
13.76%
16.54%
30-day SEC yield
—
-0.05%
-0.24%
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.
Owning all of these is not diversification. Each one sells covered calls on the same Nasdaq-100 exposure, so the three positions move together. The differences are the issuer, the fee, and how the income is produced. When holdings data is available, the overlap card on this page shows the shared names.
Side-by-side snapshot
Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric;
each column is one fund.
Seeks current income while maintaining prospects for capital appreciation by investing at least 80% of net assets in companies included in the Nasdaq-100 and selling call options with exposure to the benchmark.
Seeks to generate high monthly income in a tax efficient manner while targeting equity appreciation.
The TappAlpha Innovation 100 Growth & Daily Income ETF (the "Fund") seeks current income while maintaining prospects for capital appreciation. The Fund’s secondary investment objective is to seek exposure to the performance of the Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 ("QQQ"), subject to a limit on potential investment gains.
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. GPIQ, QQQI, and TDAQ 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.
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Goldman Sachs Asset Management is known for offering a comprehensive suite of ETFs spanning traditional and alternative investment strategies across multiple asset classes. The fund lineup encompasses income-focused offerings, factor-based strategies, thematic investments, ESG solutions, international exposure, commodities, bonds, and indexed products, reflecting a broad approach to meeting diverse investor needs. The issuer's portfolio demonstrates significant breadth, with funds serving income investors, factor-based strategists, and those seeking specialized exposure to emerging themes and alternative assets.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on GPIQ.
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.
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
TappAlpha operates a focused ETF lineup of four funds organized around two main families: Growth & Daily Income and T² Lift Series. The company's fund offerings span growth-oriented strategies and daily income approaches, with ticker symbols including TDAQ, TDAX, TSPY, and TSYX that target investors seeking regular income generation or equity growth exposure. As a smaller, specialized ETF provider, TappAlpha positions itself in a niche segment of the ETF market focused on daily income strategies and differentiated growth approaches.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on TDAQ.
GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF), QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF), TDAQ (TappAlpha Innovation 100 Growth & Daily Income ETF) are dividend ETFs that take different approaches.
TDAQ offers the highest reported yield at 16.83%, followed by QQQI at 13.69%, GPIQ at 10.28%.
GPIQ is the cheapest with an expense ratio of 0.29%, compared to 0.68% for QQQI and 0.83% for TDAQ.
QQQI is the largest fund by assets ($15.0B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
Still deciding? Track GPIQ, QQQI & TDAQ for free
Create a free Dividend Vision account to keep them on a watchlist, get notified when they declare dividends, and see how much income they would add to your portfolio.
On a $10,000 investment: GPIQ generates ~$85.67 cash per distribution, QQQI generates ~$114.08 cash per distribution, TDAQ generates ~$140.25 cash per distribution at current distribution rates.
GPIQ yield10.28%
QQQI yield13.69%
TDAQ yield16.83%
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000: GPIQ costs ~$290, QQQI costs ~$680, TDAQ costs ~$830 in fees (simplified, not compounded).
GPIQ ER0.29%
QQQI ER0.68%
TDAQ ER0.83%
Strategy & risk
All of these funds wrap NASDAQ 100 with options-based income strategies (GPIQ: covered call, QQQI: active, TDAQ: growth). The differences are yield target, fee, and issuer — not the underlying mechanic.
GPIQ beta1.0964
QQQI beta1.0553
TDAQ beta1.287
Fund details
GPIQ is managed by Goldman Sachs (launched 10/24/2023) with $6.12B in assets. QQQI is managed by NEOS (launched 01/29/2024) with $15.0B in assets. TDAQ is managed by TappAlpha (launched 09/04/2025) with $386M in assets.
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 TDAQ, QQQI, and GPIQ?
All three take Nasdaq-100 exposure and sell call options against it, paying the premium out as cash. The overlay and the manager are what differ: TappAlpha Innovation 100 Growth & Daily Income ETF writes daily-expiry calls against Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ), while NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF and Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF write options on the index itself and pay monthly. Cost is 0.83%, 0.68%, and 0.29%; size is $386M, $15.0B, and $6.12B. Distributions as of September 2026 are 16.83%, 13.69%, and 10.28%. The overlay, not a one-date yield, is the choice.
Do TDAQ, QQQI, and GPIQ hold the same stocks?
Broadly yes. NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF and Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF both track the Nasdaq-100, and TappAlpha Innovation 100 Growth & Daily Income ETF takes its exposure through Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ) — the same index in a different wrapper. Holding two of them stacks the same mega-cap book under two option programmes rather than diversifying it. Beta is 1.287, 1.0553, and 1.0964, which is a better read on how much upside each overlay gives up than the headline distribution is.
Which of GPIQ, QQQI, TDAQ is best for dividend income?
It depends on your goals. TDAQ currently offers the highest reported distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility, and funds without an established distribution history have no comparable yield to evaluate. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.
What is the difference between GPIQ, QQQI, TDAQ?
All of these funds track NASDAQ 100 with options-based income strategies — the individual labels (GPIQ: covered call, QQQI: active, TDAQ: growth) describe closely related mechanics (covered calls are a specific type of options strategy). The real differences are yield target (GPIQ 10.28%, QQQI 13.69%, TDAQ 16.83%), expense ratio, and issuer.
Can I hold GPIQ, QQQI, TDAQ together?
You can, but expect significant overlap. All of these funds use options-based income strategies on NASDAQ 100, so holding them together gives you multiple wrappers around effectively the same exposure — not true diversification. Weigh issuer, fee, and yield differences rather than treating them as complementary.
Which of GPIQ, QQQI and TDAQ is safest?
By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — they are effectively tied: GPIQ scores 84, QQQI scores 84, TDAQ scores 79. Neither has a clear safety edge on that measure. QQQI has also shown lower price volatility (beta 1.06 vs 1.29 for TDAQ). 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 the lowest fees among GPIQ, QQQI, TDAQ?
GPIQ has an expense ratio of 0.29%, QQQI has an expense ratio of 0.68%, TDAQ has an expense ratio of 0.83%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 generate in each?
$10,000 in GPIQ yields ~$85.67 cash per distribution ($1,028.00/year). $10,000 in QQQI yields ~$114.08 cash per distribution ($1,369.00/year). $10,000 in TDAQ yields ~$140.25 cash per distribution ($1,683.00/year).
Explore related screeners
Lateral filters that include these funds — browse the full peer set on DividendVision.
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
These three securities are all ETFs tracking the Nasdaq-100 (or QQQ proxy) that use covered call writing to generate monthly income. GPIQ and QQQI invest directly in Nasdaq-100 constituents while writing calls; TDAQ tracks QQQ itself but with daily option rolls rather than periodic rebalancing. The core tradeoff is between yield, fund maturity, and the aggressiveness of the call-writing overlay.
How they differ
TDAQ's defining feature is its use of zero-days-to-expiration (0DTE) options—rolling daily—which theoretically captures more frequent premium but introduces significantly higher option-turnover costs and operational complexity than the monthly or periodic rolls of GPIQ and QQQI. Income yield differs sharply across the three: TDAQ offers 16.83% versus 13.69% for QQQI and 10.28% for GPIQ, a spread wide enough to raise questions about sustainability and NAV erosion risk. GPIQ has the longest track record (10/24/2023) and the lowest expense ratio at 0.29%, while QQQI, the largest by AUM at $15.0B, pairs a 13.69% yield with 0.68% in costs. TDAQ is the newest (09/04/2025) and smallest at $386M, relying on daily rebalancing rather than the conventional covered-call schedule.
Who each is best for
GPIQ: Fits investors seeking moderate monthly income (10.28%) from Nasdaq-100 exposure without the operational complexity of daily option rolls or the yield targets that may require aggressive cap strikes—those comfortable with a balanced approach between income and principal preservation.
TDAQ: Matches investors willing to accept the highest stated yield (16.83%) and the operational model of daily option rolls, likely with higher awareness of NAV volatility and optionality costs; suitable for those comfortable holding a newer, smaller fund with experimental mechanics and a higher beta of 1.287.
Key risks to know
NAV erosion at extreme distribution yields.TDAQ's 16.83% yield, if sustained, would distribute the entire NAV in 1 year before any capital gains; QQQI's 13.69% poses similar pressure. Neither fund's inception date is long enough to prove whether high distributions rely on capital return or genuine call premium, making past NAV trends difficult to assess for newer vehicles.
0DTE option roll risk and daily rebalancing costs.TDAQ's stated daily rolls incur repeated transaction costs, bid-ask friction, and gamma risk that may not be fully captured in the published 0.83% expense ratio. A fund rolling options every day faces more execution risk and volatility in strike selection than monthly or quarterly peers.
Call cap and upside truncation. All three funds limit equity upside by design; if Nasdaq-100 rallies sharply, the call strikes effectively cap gains. TDAQ's higher beta (1.287) does not offset this cap—it amplifies the volatility of the capped return, creating asymmetric drawdown risk.
Concentration in technology. All three track the Nasdaq-100, which carries heavy exposure to large-cap technology and AI-adjacent names; economic slowdown, software-revenue deceleration, or sustained interest-rate elevation poses correlated downside for all three simultaneously. TDAQ's 16.83% yield and daily option mechanics appeal to tactical traders with high conviction in daily premium capture and comfort with NAV volatility, but the fund's 09/04/2025 inception date offers no real-world track record through a complete market cycle. All three carry cap risk and concentrated technology exposure; past performance does not predict 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.
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.
