NASA
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ETF Comparison
NASA vs XSPC: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of Tema Space Innovators ETF and VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 6, 2026
No track record yet. XSPC launched within the last six months. The forward distribution rate is left blank until a payout is published.
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Price and total return
Compare the same available dates. Add a ticker or benchmark below; these controls change the chart only. The snapshot and article describe the original comparison.
Interactive history loads here. The snapshot and period returns remain available when chart history cannot be loaded.
Distribution Safety Score
An estimate of distribution reliability, not price or principal safety, a probability, or a guarantee. Score methodology.
XSPC
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  NASA |  XSPC |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Tema Space Innovators ETF | VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF |
| Issuer | Tema ETFs | VegaShares |
| Last Close | $19.29 as of November 6, 2026 | $16.79 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | — | — |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | — | — |
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.75% |
| AUM | $1.33B | $1.75M |
| Distribution frequency | None | None |
| Underlying index | Actively managed (no tracked index recorded) | — |
| Objective | Actively managed ETF investing in companies driving the space economy, including aerospace, satellite, and space-enabling technologies. | Provide exposure to the fund's underlying index or strategy per issuer materials. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 03/31/2026 | 06/15/2026 |
| Beta | 2.828 | — |
— 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.
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.
NASA has outpaced XSPC over the year to date, posting a -29.75% total return against -39.49%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | Since Jun 2026 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NASA | -29.75% | -44.68% | 53.4% | -2.90 | -3.65 | -44.7% |
| XSPC | -39.49% | -39.49% | 53.4% | -2.50 | -3.13 | -39.5% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of November 5, 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 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.
Not a distribution payer
NASA (Tema Space Innovators ETF) has no distribution rate on file and its distribution frequency is None. NASA is not a payer. The blank yield is not a zero yield. XSPC (VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF) has no distribution rate on file and its distribution frequency is None. XSPC is not a payer. The blank yield is not a zero yield.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
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.
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs15
Total AUM$4.23B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Tema ETFs is known for offering thematically focused and income-oriented strategies that target specific industries and trends rather than broad market exposure. The issuer's lineup spans both income-generating funds and thematic investments centered on sectors such as defense, healthcare, technology, and infrastructure, with tickers including ARMY, CANC, DSPY, HLTH, LAZR, NASA, and VOLT. Tema's approach appeals to investors seeking targeted exposure to niche market segments, combining specialized industry focus with dividend and yield strategies.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on NASA.
ETFs7
Total AUM$79.0M
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.
Quick verdict
NASA (Tema Space Innovators ETF) and XSPC (VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.
NASA has $1.33B in assets vs $1.75M for XSPC, but XSPC only launched June 2026 — AUM comparisons will become more meaningful as it builds a track record.
Top-holdings overlap
Positions that appear in every fund's top 10. Issuers disclose only the largest weights, so this captures the overlap of the concentrated end of each book — not the full portfolios.
3 shared positions
NASA 23.5% of its top-10 weight
XSPC 28.9% of its top-10 weight
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at current distribution rates, NASA has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available, while XSPC has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available.
NASA yield—
XSPC yield—
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, NASA would cost approximately $750 in fees vs $750 for XSPC (simplified, not compounded). Both charge the same expense ratio.
NASA ER0.75%
XSPC ER0.75%
Strategy & risk
NASA is an actively managed ETF, while XSPC is an ETF built around a thematic strategy.
NASA beta2.828
XSPC beta—
Fund details
NASA is managed by Tema ETFs (launched 03/31/2026) with $1.33B in assets. XSPC is managed by VegaShares (launched 06/15/2026) with $1.75M in assets.
NASA AUM$1.33B
XSPC AUM$1.75M
Frequently asked questions
Which of NASA or XSPC pays more dividend income?
Neither NASA nor XSPC currently reports a distribution yield, so neither is an income fund today. Compare them on holdings, cost, and total return instead.
What is the difference between NASA and XSPC?
NASA (Tema Space Innovators ETF) is an actively managed ETF, while XSPC (VegaShares SpaceX & Beyond Earth ETF) is an ETF built around a thematic strategy. They are issued by Tema ETFs and VegaShares respectively.
Can I hold both NASA and XSPC?
Yes. Their disclosed top-10 holdings share only 3 positions, so combining both adds mostly distinct underlying names — see the holdings-overlap section above. Overlap outside the disclosed top 10 can still exist.
Which has lower fees, NASA or XSPC?
NASA 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 NASA vs XSPC generate?
At current distribution rates, NASA does not pay distributions, so there is no cash income to estimate. XSPC does not pay distributions, so there is no cash income to estimate.
Which has performed better historically, NASA or XSPC?
NASA has outpaced XSPC over the year to date, posting a -29.75% total return against -39.49%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare XSPC with
Popular comparisons
NASA vs XSPC — at a glance
Generated October 31, 2026.
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
NASA and XSPC are both equity ETFs targeting the space economy, but they differ fundamentally in scale and approach. NASA is an actively managed fund with $1.33B in assets, while XSPC is a much smaller thematic ETF with $1.75M. Neither currently distributes income, making them pure capital-appreciation vehicles for investors betting on space-sector growth.
How they differ
The biggest structural difference is management style: NASA employs active management to select space-economy companies, while XSPC tracks an underlying index or strategy. Both charge an identical 0.75% expense ratio. NASA publishes a 2.828 of 2.828, reflecting significant sensitivity to broad market moves. Neither fund pays distributions, so the comparison hinges entirely on capital gains and the quality of their underlying space-economy picks or index methodology.
Who each is best for
- NASA: Fits investors with higher risk tolerance seeking active stock-picking within the space sector, comfortable with marked swings tied to aerospace and satellite innovation cycles.
- XSPC: Designed for investors who prefer systematic index-based exposure to space themes and accept a much smaller, less-established fund structure in exchange for rules-based selection.
Key risks to know
- Concentration and nascency: Both funds focus narrowly on space-economy companies, a sector that remains capital-intensive, regulatory-dependent, and unproven at scale. Concentration amplifies single-company or program risk—launch delays, contract losses, or regulatory setbacks can cascade across holdings.
- High beta volatility (NASA): NASA's 2.828 beta means it will likely move more aggressively than the S&P 500 in either direction, falling harder in downturns. This volatility is inherent to space-sector exposure. Trading volume may be thin, and the fund faces structural pressure to grow or risk eventual closure. NASA's $1.33B base is vastly larger and more stable.
- No income buffer: Because neither fund pays distributions, investors are fully exposed to mark-to-market price swings with no yield cushion during downturns.
Bottom line
If you want active management with a stable, larger fund vehicle, NASA offers concentrated exposure to space-economy innovation with transparent volatility metrics. If you prefer index-based selection and accept operational risk from a smaller fund, XSPC provides an alternative approach. Both are high-beta sector plays; neither suits conservative portfolios. 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.
These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.