DV
Dividend Vision

ETF Comparison

MARS vs XSPC: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of Roundhill Space & Technology ETF and VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Data updated September 18, 2026

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.

MARS has lagged XSPC over the shared window since Jun 2026, posting a -24.62% total return against -16.52%. 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.
SymbolSince Jun 2026Volatility Sharpe Sortino Max drawdown
MARS-24.62%51.4%-2.22-3.07-33.8%
XSPC-16.52%53.8%-1.41-1.97-30.8%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of September 18, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; windows of one year or longer are annualized. “Since Jun 2026” measures every fund from June 16, 2026 — 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 shared window since Jun 2026. 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 shared window since Jun 2026) — 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.
MetricMARSXSPC
Full nameRoundhill Space & Technology ETFVegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF
IssuerRoundhill InvestmentsVegaShares
Last Close$25.51 as of September 18, 2026$21.01 as of September 18, 2026
Distribution rate——
Distribution Safety Score™ ——
Expense ratio0.75%0.75%
AUM$46.2M$2.12M
Distribution frequencyNoneNone
Underlying index——
Objective—Provide exposure to the fund's underlying index or strategy per issuer materials.
Asset classEquityEquity
Inception date03/04/202606/15/2026
Beta2.6714—

— Distribution rate, Safety-Adjusted Yield, last dividend, and ex-dividend date are not yet available because XSPC launched June 2026; these fields will populate after the first distribution.

Bottom lineWe won't call this one: XSPC launched June 2026, so there is not yet a track record to compare. Compare the strategy, cost and holdings in the sections above and treat any performance figures for the newer ETF as provisional.

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
ETFs56
Total AUM$37.3B

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 MARS.

See all Roundhill Investments ETFs
VegaShares
ETFs5
Total AUM$60.9M

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

VegaShares specializes in options-based and thematic ETFs designed to generate income and capitalize on emerging trends. The issuer's lineup spans income-focused strategies, including covered call funds, alongside thematic offerings that target specific market segments and innovation themes. VegaShares serves investors seeking alternative approaches to traditional equity exposure, with a concentrated portfolio of strategically named funds addressing both income generation and sector-specific growth opportunities.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on XSPC.

See all VegaShares 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

MARS (Roundhill Space & Technology ETF) and XSPC (VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.

MARS has $46.2M in assets vs $2.12M for XSPC, but XSPC only launched June 2026 — AUM comparisons will become more meaningful as it builds a track record.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, MARS has no reported distribution yield yet, so a monthly income estimate is not available, while XSPC has no reported distribution yield yet, so a monthly income estimate is not available, at current distribution rates.

MARS yield—
XSPC yield—

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, MARS would cost approximately $750 in fees vs $750 for XSPC (simplified, not compounded). Both charge the same expense ratio.

MARS ER0.75%
XSPC ER0.75%

Strategy & risk

MARS is an ETF, while XSPC is an ETF built around a thematic strategy.

MARS beta2.6714
XSPC beta—

Fund details

MARS is managed by Roundhill Investments (launched 03/04/2026) with $46.2M in assets. XSPC is managed by VegaShares (launched 06/15/2026) with $2.12M in assets.

MARS AUM$46.2M
XSPC AUM$2.12M
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

Which of MARS or XSPC pays more dividend income?

XSPC currently reports a distribution yield, while MARS has not yet established a full distribution history. A direct income comparison is not yet meaningful — check back once both funds have published several consecutive distributions.

What is the difference between MARS and XSPC?

MARS (Roundhill Space & Technology ETF) is an ETF, while XSPC (VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF) is an ETF built around a thematic strategy. They are issued by Roundhill Investments and VegaShares respectively.

Can I hold both MARS and XSPC?

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.

Which has lower fees, MARS or XSPC?

MARS and XSPC both charge the same expense ratio of 0.75%, so neither is cheaper on fees — pick based on yield, strategy, or underlying index instead.

How much income does $10,000 in MARS vs XSPC generate?

At current rates, MARS has not established a distribution history yet, so a monthly income estimate is not available. XSPC has not established a distribution history yet, so a monthly income estimate is not available.

Which has performed better historically, MARS or XSPC?

MARS has lagged XSPC over the shared window since Jun 2026, posting a -24.62% total return against -16.52%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

More comparisons to explore

MARS vs XSPC — at a glance

Generated September 19, 2026.

Overview

MARS and XSPC are both thematic equity ETFs tracking exposure to space and technology companies, each launched in 2026. Both charge 0.75%, but they differ substantially in asset base and strategy scope. MARS discloses a beta of 2.6714, reflecting elevated sensitivity to market moves; XSPC's volatility characteristics are not published. Both funds pay no distributions and carry identical 0.75% expense ratios, so fee structure offers no differentiation. The holdings approach likely differs: MARS appears positioned as a general space-and-tech exposure vehicle, whereas XSPC's branding suggests concentration in or around SpaceX and related companies, though exact portfolio composition would clarify the degree of overlap and concentration risk.

Who each is best for

MARS: Fits investors seeking broad exposure to space and technology innovation with a time horizon that accommodates the high volatility embedded in the 2.6714 beta and the capital intensity of the sector.

XSPC: Designed for investors making a concentrated directional bet on SpaceX's trajectory and closely related space-sector companies, or those comfortable accepting narrow thematic exposure and illiquidity as the price of focused positioning.

Key risks to know

  • Thematic concentration risk: Both funds isolate exposure to nascent space and technology sectors that lack the diversification of broader equity indices. A downturn in space commercialization funding or regulatory tightening could affect both simultaneously. Holdings overlap is possible and should be verified before combining them in a portfolio.
  • Elevated market sensitivity: MARS's 2.6714 signals amplified sensitivity to broad market swings. Investors should expect drawdowns significantly steeper than equities generally during downturns. MARS, while larger at $46.2M, still operates at a scale where sustained investor outflows could prompt restructuring or closure.
  • Speculative and unprofitable holdings: Space commercialization remains capital-intensive and cash-flow challenged. Many holdings may not yet be profitable, and withdrawal of venture funding or government contracts could trigger significant losses. If you're making a concentrated bet on SpaceX or prefer a tighter thematic focus regardless of liquidity tradeoffs, XSPC's narrower approach aligns with that thesis. Both are new funds with limited operating history, so 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.

How to read a fund's stats How expense ratios eat returns Correlation between two funds

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