ETF Comparison

GPIQ vs QYLD: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Data updated May 20, 2026

Goldman Sachs

ETFs2

Total AUM$7.6B

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

Goldman Sachs operates a focused ETF lineup of two income-focused funds designed to provide dividend and yield-generating strategies for investors. The fund family includes GPIQ and GPIX, which concentrate on delivering regular income distributions through their respective investment approaches. With a specialized niche in the income ETF space, Goldman Sachs maintains a streamlined portfolio that emphasizes yield-oriented strategies.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on GPIQ.

See all Goldman Sachs ETFs

Global X

ETFs24

Total AUM$34.7B

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

Global X is known for specializing in high-yield and income-focused ETFs, particularly through their popular covered call and SuperDividend fund families. Their lineup of 17 funds emphasizes income generation strategies including covered calls, dividend growth, and risk-managed income approaches, with widely-traded tickers such as QYLD, XYLD, and SDIV. The issuer focuses on serving investors seeking regular distributions and alternative income strategies rather than traditional growth-oriented investing.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on QYLD.

See all Global X ETFs

Side-by-side snapshot

	GPIQ	QYLD
Full name	Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF
Issuer	Goldman Sachs	Global X
Last Close	$57.27 as of May 20, 2026	$17.71 as of May 20, 2026
Distribution yield	9.63%	12.06%
Expense ratio	0.29%	0.60%
AUM	$3.9B	$8.3B
Distribution frequency	Monthly	Monthly
Underlying index	NASDAQ 100	NASDAQ 100
Objective	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.	Covered Call
Asset class	Equity	Equity
Inception date	03/20/2024	12/11/2013
Beta	—	0.49
Last dividend	$0.48	$0.18
Ex-dividend date	05/01/2026	05/18/2026

Income calculator

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

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — no signup required.

Build a sample portfolio Forecast income

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

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

Quick verdict

GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) and QYLD (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF) are both monthly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

QYLD offers the higher yield at 12.06% vs 9.63% for GPIQ. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

GPIQ is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.29% compared to 0.60%.

QYLD is the larger fund by assets ($8.3B), which generally means tighter spreads and better liquidity.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, GPIQ would generate roughly $80.25/month, while QYLD would produce $100.50/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay monthly distributions.

GPIQ yield9.63%

QYLD yield12.06%

Monthly diff on $10K$20.25

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, GPIQ would cost approximately $290 in fees vs $600 for QYLD (simplified, not compounded). The $310.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

GPIQ ER0.29%

QYLD ER0.60%

Strategy & risk

Both GPIQ and QYLD wrap NASDAQ 100 with options-based income overlays (nasdaq100 and covered call). The practical differences are yield target, fee structure, and issuer track record — not the underlying mechanic.

GPIQ beta—

QYLD beta0.49

Fund details

GPIQ is managed by Goldman Sachs (launched 03/20/2024) with $3.9B in assets. QYLD is managed by Global X (launched 12/11/2013) with $8.3B in assets.

GPIQ AUM$3.9B

QYLD AUM$8.3B

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is GPIQ or QYLD better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. QYLD 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.

What is the difference between GPIQ and QYLD?

Both GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) and QYLD (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF) track NASDAQ 100 with options-based income strategies — the labels "nasdaq100" and "covered call" describe closely related mechanics (covered calls are a specific type of options strategy). The real differences show up in yield target (9.63% vs 12.06%), expense ratio (0.29% vs 0.60%), and issuer (Goldman Sachs vs Global X).

Can I hold both GPIQ and QYLD?

You can, but expect significant overlap. Both funds use options-based income strategies on NASDAQ 100, so holding them together gives you two wrappers around effectively the same exposure — not true diversification. Weigh issuer, fee, and yield differences rather than treating them as complementary.

Which has lower fees, GPIQ or QYLD?

GPIQ has an expense ratio of 0.29% while QYLD charges 0.60%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in GPIQ vs QYLD generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in GPIQ would generate roughly $80.25 per month ($963.00 annually). The same in QYLD would produce about $100.50 per month ($1,206.00 annually).

More comparisons to explore

People also compare GPIQ with

People also compare QYLD with

Popular comparisons

GPIQ vs QYLD — at a glance

Generated April 2026 from current fund data.

Overview

GPIQ and QYLD are both monthly-paying covered call ETFs built on the Nasdaq-100, but they differ meaningfully in age, scale, and call-writing intensity. GPIQ launched in March 2024 as Goldman Sachs' answer to the category; QYLD has operated since 2013 and manages nearly 2.6x the assets. Both harvest option premium to generate income, but QYLD's higher distribution rate (11.81% vs. 10.32%) and longer track record come with a higher expense ratio (0.60% vs. 0.29%) and hints at more aggressive call selling.

How they differ

The biggest difference is call-writing depth: QYLD's 11.81% distribution rate suggests it's selling calls further out of the money or at higher frequency than GPIQ's 10.32% rate, which is a meaningful gap in premium collection. GPIQ is newer, smaller ($3.1B AUM vs. $8.1B), and charges significantly less in fees—29 basis points versus 60 basis points—a 2x difference in expense ratio that will compound over time. QYLD has a longer operational history (12+ years of live data) and a lower beta (0.48 vs. 0.0), which suggests it may have more upside capture during strong Nasdaq rallies, though the 0.0 beta for GPIQ likely reflects its brief track record rather than true delta-neutral positioning.

Who each is best for

GPIQ: Investors seeking Nasdaq-100 exposure with meaningful income who value lower fees and don't mind holding a newer fund with limited historical performance data. Works best in taxable accounts where the monthly distribution rhythm helps with tax planning.

QYLD: Income-focused investors who've built conviction in covered calls over a 12+ year cycle and prefer the established liquidity and track record. Suitable for buy-and-hold portfolio builders in IRAs or taxable accounts seeking steady monthly cash flow.

Key risks to know

NAV erosion from high yield: Both funds distribute 10%+ annually. While covered calls can sustain this, sharp Nasdaq rallies may force early call assignment, capping gains and requiring re-deployment at lower call premiums.

Call assignment risk: If the Nasdaq-100 rallies sharply, calls will be exercised, locking in losses for investors who bought near recent highs (GPIQ: $54.63; QYLD: $18.00).

Expense drag and tracking error: QYLD's 60 bps fee versus GPIQ's 29 bps compounds to ~31 bps annually in extra drag—material for a yield-harvesting strategy.

Limited upside capture: Both funds sacrifice upper-tail equity returns to fund distributions. This trade-off is steeper during strong bull markets.

Bottom line

If you prioritize low fees and don't mind a newer fund's limited track record, GPIQ offers the same Nasdaq-100 covered call playbook at nearly half the cost. If you value the comfort of a 12-year operating history and proven execution, QYLD's higher yield compensates somewhat for its higher cost—but investors should decide whether an extra ~150 basis points of annual distribution is worth 31 basis points of extra fees. Neither fund is a buy-and-hold equity replacement; both are income vehicles that will underperform in strong bull markets and should be sized accordingly.

AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.