ETF Comparison

MAGS vs SPMO: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF and Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Updated October 16, 2026

How these figures are calculated: methodology.

Best for

MAGSInvestors who want higher current income (1.37% paid over the past 12 months vs 0.78% for SPMO).
SPMOInvestors who want broad equity exposure.

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. 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.

MAGS has lagged SPMO over the trailing twelve months, posting a 13.60% total return against 18.17%. The lead holds up over 3 years too: SPMO has compounded at 34.62% a year, against 32.95% for MAGS. 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.
Symbol	YTD cumulative	1Y cumulative	3Y annualized	Since Apr 2023	Volatility	Sharpe	Sortino	Max drawdown
MAGS	8.07%	13.60%	32.95%	36.59%	26.3%	0.93	1.36	-29.9%
SPMO	18.78%	18.17%	34.62%	31.14%	22.0%	1.16	1.70	-20.1%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of October 16, 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 Apr 2023” measures every fund from April 11, 2023 — 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 trailing 3 years. 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 trailing 3 years) — 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.
Metric	MAGS	SPMO
Full name	Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF
Issuer	Roundhill Investments	Invesco
Underlying index	Actively managed (no tracked index recorded)	S&P 500 Momentum Index
Last Close	$71.28 as of October 16, 2026	$140.89 as of October 16, 2026
Distribution rate	0.62%	0.69%
Trailing 12-month yield	1.37%	0.78%
Distribution Safety Score™	50	72
Safety-Adjusted Yield	—	0.50%
Expense ratio	0.30%	0.13%
AUM	$5.71B	$21.8B
Distribution frequency	Annual	Quarterly
Objective	Actively managed fund that seeks capital appreciation through equal-weight exposure to the "Magnificent Seven" — a group of seven companies recognized for market dominance in technological innovation.	Track the S&P 500 Momentum Index, providing factor exposure to the highest momentum names within the S&P 500.
Asset class	Equity	Equity
Inception date	04/11/2023	10/09/2015
Beta	1.32	1.4
Last dividend	$0.976179	$0.243
Ex-dividend date	12/30/2025	09/21/2026

Bottom lineChoose MAGS if you want higher current income (1.37% paid over the past 12 months vs 0.78% for SPMO). Choose SPMO if you want broad equity exposure.

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.

Roundhill Investments

ETFs57

Total AUM$31.4B

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 MAGS.

See all ETFs from Roundhill Investments

Invesco

ETFs247

Total AUM$983B

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

Invesco is a major ETF provider known for offering a comprehensive lineup spanning multiple asset classes and investment strategies. The company specializes in income-focused products including dividend, covered call, and bond strategies, while also maintaining broad exposure across equity, factor-based, thematic, and ESG investing themes. Invesco's portfolio ranges from index-tracking funds to alternatives and specialized offerings like digital assets and BulletShares, making it one of the more expansive ETF families available to investors.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on SPMO.

See all ETFs from Invesco

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

MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) and SPMO (Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF) are both dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

MAGS has paid the higher yield over the past 12 months, 1.37% vs 0.78% for SPMO. We compare trailing 12-month yields here because MAGS's latest distribution annualizes to 0.62% against 1.37% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income.

SPMO is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.13% compared to 0.30%.

They have different reference exposures: MAGS is linked to Magnificent Seven stocks (equal-weight) while SPMO is linked to S&P 500 Momentum Index, which means their performance drivers differ.

SPMO is the larger fund by assets ($21.8B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.

Who should choose each?

Choose MAGS

Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF

Want higher current income — MAGS yields 1.37% paid over the past 12 months vs 0.78% for SPMO.
Want broad equity exposure.

Choose SPMO

Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF

Want broad equity exposure.
Want to keep costs low — a 0.13% expense ratio vs 0.30% for MAGS.

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

Still deciding? Track MAGS & SPMO 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.

Add to my watchlist See what a free account includes

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, MAGS would generate roughly $62.00 cash per distribution, while SPMO would produce $17.25 cash per distribution, at current distribution rates.

MAGS yield0.62%

SPMO yield0.69%

Cash diff on $10K$44.75

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, MAGS would cost approximately $300 in fees vs $130 for SPMO (simplified, not compounded). The $170.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

MAGS ER0.30%

SPMO ER0.13%

Strategy & risk

MAGS is actively managed around Magnificent Seven stocks (equal-weight) exposure with a technology approach, while SPMO tracks S&P 500 Momentum Index with an index approach. Beta is 1.32 for MAGS and 1.4 for SPMO, making MAGS the less volatile of the two by this measure.

MAGS beta1.32

SPMO beta1.4

Fund details

MAGS is managed by Roundhill Investments (launched 04/11/2023) with $5.71B in assets. SPMO is managed by Invesco (launched 10/09/2015) with $21.8B in assets.

MAGS AUM$5.71B

SPMO AUM$21.8B

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

What is the current distribution rate for MAGS and SPMO?

MAGS currently distributes 0.62% and SPMO 0.69%, based on fund data updated October 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.

Is MAGS or SPMO better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. MAGS has paid the higher trailing 12-month yield (1.37% vs 0.78%). We compare trailing 12-month yields here because MAGS's latest distribution annualizes to 0.62% against 1.37% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income. 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 MAGS and SPMO?

MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) is actively managed around Magnificent Seven stocks (equal-weight) exposure with a technology approach, while SPMO (Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF) tracks S&P 500 Momentum Index with an index approach. They are issued by Roundhill Investments and Invesco respectively.

Can I hold both MAGS and SPMO?

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 MAGS or SPMO safer?

By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — SPMO scores 72, MAGS scores 50, so SPMO'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.

Which has lower fees, MAGS or SPMO?

MAGS has an expense ratio of 0.30% while SPMO charges 0.13%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in MAGS vs SPMO generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in MAGS would generate roughly $62.00 cash per distribution ($62.00 annually). The same in SPMO would produce about $17.25 cash per distribution ($69.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, MAGS or SPMO?

More comparisons to explore

Popular comparisons

Dividend dates and history

MAGS vs SPMO — at a glance

Generated October 17, 2026.

Overview

MAGS is an actively managed ETF providing equal-weight exposure to the Magnificent Seven—Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Nvidia, Tesla, and Meta—seeking capital appreciation through concentrated bets on technology leaders. SPMO is an index-tracking ETF that captures momentum factor exposure across the entire S&P 500, rebalancing to hold the highest-momentum large-cap names. The key distinction: MAGS bets on seven specific mega-cap stocks; SPMO diversifies across the 500 by selecting for price momentum.

How they differ

MAGS concentrates portfolio weight equally across seven companies, while SPMO spreads exposure across a much larger opportunity set filtered by momentum metrics. This difference in breadth matters: MAGS's $71.28 price and 1.32 beta indicate higher sensitivity to large-cap tech swings, whereas SPMO's 1.4 beta and $21.8B asset base reflect a broader, more diversified approach. MAGS launched 3 years, making it a newer strategy, while SPMO has a track record extending back 11 years.

Who each is best for

MAGS: Fits investors seeking concentrated exposure to the most dominant U.S. technology companies and willing to accept higher concentration risk and beta in exchange for a tightly focused thematic bet.

SPMO: Fits investors who want broad large-cap exposure filtered through a momentum lens, preferring the diversification and lower cost of an index-tracking approach while maintaining growth-oriented positioning.

Key risks to know

Concentration risk in MAGS: Equal-weight exposure to only seven stocks means individual company news—regulatory action, earnings miss, or competitive pressure—can materially swing the fund's NAV. SPMO's broader index construction mitigates this single-name risk.

Momentum factor reversion: SPMO's reliance on price momentum as a selection criterion means the highest-performing names today may underperform when sentiment shifts; momentum factors have exhibited cyclical periods of underperformance relative to the broad market.

Sector overlap: Both funds hold significant exposure to the same mega-cap technology names, particularly Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google. Holdings correlation may be higher than their different strategies suggest.

MAGS valuation sensitivity: The seven mega-cap tech stocks command premium valuations; MAGS's equal-weight structure means it holds the highest weight in the smallest constituent by market cap, amplifying exposure to valuation resets if growth expectations moderate.

SPMO index rebalancing lag: The momentum index rebalances periodically, which may mean SPMO captures some of a factor's downside before the index adjusts holdings; during momentum reversals, trailing index methodology can lag.

Bottom line

If you want pure exposure to the Magnificent Seven with an equal voice for each, MAGS offers a tightly focused bet; if you prefer broad momentum exposure across 500 names with lower fees and longer operating history, SPMO stands out. Both funds emphasize capital gains over current income and carry higher beta than the broad market, so neither is designed as a defensive holding. 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.

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

These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.