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.
QDTE has outpaced QQQI over the trailing twelve months, posting a 18.92% total return against 14.08%. Measured from Mar 2024 — the start of shared available history — QDTE has compounded at 18.77% a year versus 17.11% for QQQI. 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 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 Mar 2024” measures every fund from March 7, 2024 — 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, SEC yield and return of capital
Metric
QDTE
QQQI
Forward distribution rate
24.15%
14.19%
Trailing 12-month yield
44.94%
14.25%
30-day SEC yield
—
-0.06%
Return of capital
100.00%
—
Total return (price change plus reinvested distributions) is the Total returns section above. Return of capital is the share of a recent distribution that was not income. A 30-day SEC yield can sit far from the headline distribution rate; both numbers are the fund's own published fields.
Seeks weekly income by investing at least 80% of net assets in instruments that provide exposure to the Nasdaq-100 Index and writing zero-days-to-expiration (0DTE) call options against that exposure.
Seeks to generate high monthly income in a tax efficient manner while targeting equity appreciation.
Bottom lineChoose QDTE if you want to maximize current income — roughly 24.15%, generated by selling options premium. Choose QQQI if you are comfortable trading away most upside for a large, steady payout. QDTE and QQQI both use option or derivative overlays. Their tradeoff is the underlying exposure, how each option strategy is implemented, and the yield each targets; either overlay can limit upside participation, so neither offers uncapped price exposure.
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. QDTE and QQQI 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.
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 QDTE.
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.
QDTE (Roundhill Nasdaq-100® 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) and QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) are both dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.
QDTE offers the higher yield at 24.15% vs 14.19% for QQQI. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.
QQQI is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.68% compared to 0.96%.
QQQI is the larger fund by assets ($15.2B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
Want to maximize current income — QDTE distributes roughly 24.15% from selling options premium, vs 14.19% for QQQI.
Are comfortable with an options-income strategy — a large payout in exchange for capped upside.
Choose QQQI
NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
Are comfortable with an options-income strategy — a large payout in exchange for capped upside.
Want to keep costs low — a 0.68% expense ratio vs 0.96% for QDTE.
Not sure? Use the income calculator and snapshot above to weigh these trade-offs against your own goals.
Still deciding? Track QDTE & QQQI 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, QDTE would generate roughly $46.44 cash per distribution, while QQQI would produce $118.25 cash per distribution, at current distribution rates.
QDTE yield24.15%
QQQI yield14.19%
Cash diff on $10K$71.81
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, QDTE would cost approximately $960 in fees vs $680 for QQQI (simplified, not compounded). The $280.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
QDTE ER0.96%
QQQI ER0.68%
Strategy & risk
QDTE tracks Nasdaq-100 with a covered call approach, while QQQI is actively managed around Nasdaq-100 exposure with an active approach. Beta is 1.1903 for QDTE and 1.0553 for QQQI, making QQQI the less volatile of the two by this measure.
QDTE beta1.1903
QQQI beta1.0553
Fund details
QDTE is managed by Roundhill Investments (launched 03/07/2024) with $901M in assets. QQQI is managed by NEOS (launched 01/29/2024) with $15.2B 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 QDTE and QQQI?
QDTE (Roundhill Nasdaq-100® 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) writes zero-days-to-expiration covered calls on a Nasdaq-100 book. QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) sells NDX call spreads structured for index-option tax treatment. Same index, different overlay. Cost is 0.96% versus 0.68%; size is $901M versus $15.2B. Distributions are 24.15% and 14.19% as of October 2026. Overlay design, not a one-date yield, is the decision.
What is the current distribution rate for QDTE and QQQI?
QDTE currently distributes 24.15% and QQQI 14.19%, 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 QDTE or QQQI better for dividend income?
It depends on your goals. QDTE 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.
Can I hold both QDTE and QQQI?
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 QDTE or QQQI safer?
By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — QQQI scores 80, QDTE scores 55, so QQQI'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, and the leverage, options-income, or crypto caveats flagged on this page apply regardless of score.
Which has lower fees, QDTE or QQQI?
QDTE has an expense ratio of 0.96% while QQQI charges 0.68%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in QDTE vs QQQI generate?
At current rates, $10,000 in QDTE would generate roughly $46.44 cash per distribution ($2,415.00 annually). The same in QQQI would produce about $118.25 cash per distribution ($1,419.00 annually).
Which has performed better historically, QDTE or QQQI?
QDTE has outpaced QQQI over the trailing twelve months, posting a 18.92% total return against 14.08%. Measured from Mar 2024 — the start of shared available history — QDTE has compounded at 18.77% a year versus 17.11% for QQQI. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
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
QDTE and QQQI are both Nasdaq-100 covered call ETFs that harvest options premiums for income, but they operate on very different income and timing cycles. The result is a stark difference in yield: QDTE targets 24.15%, while QQQI targets 14.19%.
How they differ
The single biggest difference is QDTE's 0DTE strategy versus QQQI's longer-dated approach. This drives their yield gap: QDTE's 24.15% distribution rate is roughly 10 percentage points higher than QQQI's 14.19%.
The second key difference is volatility and trading intensity. QDTE carries a 1.1903 beta versus QQQI's 1.0553, reflecting greater daily rebalancing friction and tighter call strikes typical of 0DTE strategies. Both funds are nascent; QQQI began 01/29/2024 and QDTE began 03/07/2024.
Who each is best for
QDTE: Fits investors seeking maximum weekly income through aggressive daily option writing, comfortable with higher turnover and tracking error, and holding primarily in tax-deferred accounts where weekly distributions do not create ongoing tax friction.
QQQI: Fits investors wanting high monthly income with a smoother volatility profile and lower fee drag, preferring longer-dated call rolls and tax-conscious distributions. Also suits those drawn to the larger, more established asset base.
Key risks to know
0DTE assignment and gap risk (QDTE): Writing options that expire same-day exposes QDTE to rapid repricing, sharp intraday moves, and forced position turnover during volatile opens or closes. While assignment risk is theoretically limited at 0DTE, fast-moving markets can create friction costs not fully captured in historical returns.
NAV erosion at elevated yields: Both funds distribute yields well above typical equity dividend rates. At 24.15% and 14.19%, a significant portion of payouts likely reflects return of capital or premium-harvesting depletion. Holding either security long-term risks steady NAV compression if underlying Nasdaq-100 returns do not keep pace with distributions.
High beta volatility (QDTE):QDTE's 1.1903 beta suggests amplified downside capture during Nasdaq sell-offs. Daily rebalancing of short calls compounds this effect; in sharp drawdowns, forced call rolls or assignment can lock in losses faster than monthly-rebalancing strategies.
Short call capping upside: Both funds sacrifice significant upside participation when the underlying Nasdaq-100 rallies hard. Call strike selection determines this tradeoff, but neither fund's marketing discloses strike placement or historical opportunity cost—leaving upside cap invisible until examined against the index in strong rally quarters.
Nascent track record: Both funds are less than a year old. Extended market cycles (recession, sustained volatility spike, low-volatility regime) have not been tested; performance may not reflect how these strategies behave outside the recent environment. Both funds cap upside and carry meaningful NAV-erosion risk at their current distribution rates—a concern amplified by limited track record in varied market conditions. 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.
