ETF Comparison

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

A head-to-head comparison of NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Data updated July 4, 2026

NEOS

ETFs19

Total AUM$24.2B

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.

See all NEOS ETFs

Global X

ETFs123

Total AUM$98.3B

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

Global X is known for developing thematic and alternative investment ETFs with a strong emphasis on income-generating strategies. Their 37-fund lineup spans diverse categories including covered call funds, SuperDividend income products, digital assets, commodities, and sector-specific investments, alongside traditional bond and risk-managed income options. Notable tickers like DIV, MLPA, and BCCC reflect their specialization in high-yield and alternative income strategies, positioning them as a provider focused on investors seeking yield-oriented and thematically-driven exposure.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on QYLD.

See all Global X ETFs

Side-by-side snapshot

	QQQI	QYLD
Full name	NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF	Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF
Issuer	NEOS	Global X
Last Close	$55.36 as of July 4, 2026	$18.09 as of July 4, 2026
Distribution yield	14.24%	12.30%
Distribution Safety Score	88	83
Expense ratio	0.68%	0.61%
AUM	$12.5B	$8.22B
Distribution frequency	Monthly	Monthly
Underlying index	NASDAQ 100	NASDAQ 100
Objective	Seeks to generate high monthly income in a tax efficient manner while targeting equity appreciation.	Covered Call
Asset class	Equity	Equity
Inception date	01/29/2024	12/11/2013
Beta	1.0553	0.49
Last dividend	$0.6570	$0.1854
Ex-dividend date	01/21/2026	06/22/2026

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.

Total returns

QQQI has outpaced QYLD over the trailing twelve months, posting a 23.48% total return against 20.88%. Measured from Jan 2024 — when the younger fund began trading — QQQI has compounded at 20.42% a year versus 13.56% for QYLD. QYLD has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 10.2% against 15.2% for QQQI. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Symbol	YTD	1Y	Since Jan 2024	Volatility	Sharpe	Sortino	Max drawdown
QQQI	10.50%	23.48%	20.42%	15.2%	1.09	1.53	-9.6%
QYLD	7.58%	20.88%	13.56%	10.2%	1.42	2.12	-5.0%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date, split-adjusted, as of July 2, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; longer windows are annualized. “Since Jan 2024” measures every fund from January 30, 2024 — the youngest fund's first trading day — 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.

Quick verdict

QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) and QYLD (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF) are both monthly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

QQQI offers the higher yield at 14.24% vs 12.30% for QYLD. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

QYLD is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.61% compared to 0.68%.

QQQI is the larger fund by assets ($12.5B), which generally means tighter spreads and better liquidity.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, QQQI would generate roughly $118.67/month, while QYLD would produce $102.50/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay monthly distributions.

QQQI yield14.24%

QYLD yield12.30%

Monthly diff on $10K$16.17

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, QQQI would cost approximately $680 in fees vs $610 for QYLD (simplified, not compounded). The $70.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

QQQI ER0.68%

QYLD ER0.61%

Strategy & risk

Both QQQI and QYLD wrap NASDAQ 100 with options-based income overlays (options and covered call). The practical differences are yield target, fee structure, and issuer track record — not the underlying mechanic. Beta is 1.0553 for QQQI and 0.49 for QYLD, indicating QYLD is less volatile relative to the market.

QQQI beta1.0553

QYLD beta0.49

Fund details

QQQI is managed by NEOS (launched 01/29/2024) with $12.5B in assets. QYLD is managed by Global X (launched 12/11/2013) with $8.22B in assets.

QQQI AUM$12.5B

QYLD AUM$8.22B

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is QQQI or QYLD better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. QQQI 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 QQQI and QYLD?

Both QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) and QYLD (Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF) track NASDAQ 100 with options-based income strategies — the labels "options" and "covered call" describe closely related mechanics (covered calls are a specific type of options strategy). The real differences show up in yield target (14.24% vs 12.30%), expense ratio (0.68% vs 0.61%), and issuer (NEOS vs Global X).

Can I hold both QQQI 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, QQQI or QYLD?

QQQI has an expense ratio of 0.68% while QYLD charges 0.61%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

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

At current rates, $10,000 in QQQI would generate roughly $118.67 per month ($1,424.00 annually). The same in QYLD would produce about $102.50 per month ($1,230.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, QQQI or QYLD?

More comparisons to explore

People also compare QQQI with

People also compare QYLD with

Popular comparisons

QQQI vs QYLD — at a glance

Generated June 2026 from current fund data.

Overview

QQQI and QYLD are both monthly-income ETFs built on the Nasdaq-100, but they deploy different option strategies to generate yield. QYLD uses a straightforward covered call overlay—selling call options against its full stock holdings to pocket premium. QQQI, the newer fund, employs a broader derivative strategy designed to be more tax-efficient while targeting higher monthly distributions. The key distinction is yield target: QQQI distributes 14.42% annually versus QYLD's 12.46%, and QQQI's strategy is marketed as tax-conscious.

How they differ

The most fundamental difference is their option approach. QYLD runs a pure covered call strategy, meaning it holds the 100 Nasdaq stocks and systematically sells call options on them to generate income. QQQI uses a wider derivative overlay—not just calls, but a mix of option positions designed to enhance income while managing tax drag through strategic structuring.

On yield, QQQI targets 14.42% distribution annually versus QYLD's 12.46%, a roughly 160-basis-point spread. Both pay monthly, so income arrives on the same schedule, but QQQI's higher payout comes with steeper NAV-erosion risk given the synthetic-income mechanics.

QQQI carries a 0.68% expense ratio to QYLD's 0.61%, a modest 7-basis-point difference that's dwarfed by the yield gap. QYLD has deep liquidity with $8.22B in AUM and a 12-year track record; QQQI is newer ($12.5B, but only since January 2024) and untested through a full market cycle. QYLD's beta of 0.49 signals meaningful downside dampening versus the broader market, while QQQI's beta of 1.0553 tracks much closer to Nasdaq-100 equity moves.

Who each is best for

QQQI: Fits investors seeking maximum monthly income from Nasdaq-100 exposure and willing to accept higher NAV volatility in exchange for a tax-optimized structure, particularly those prioritizing cash flow in near-term holding periods.

QYLD: Designed for income-focused investors who value a longer operational history, lower beta (less equity-like volatility), and a straightforward covered call mechanism they can understand and evaluate over multiple market cycles.

Key risks to know

NAV erosion at elevated distribution yields. QQQI's 14.42% annual payout is aggressive for an equity-based fund. Sustaining this level requires that underlying stock appreciation and option premium offset distributions; if either source falters, NAV will erode. The fund is too new to demonstrate this over a full market downturn.

Nasdaq-100 concentration and sector tilt. Both funds are entirely dependent on Nasdaq-100 performance, which is heavily weighted to technology and growth stocks. A prolonged downturn in large-cap tech directly impairs both the stock holdings and the premium available from option sales, compressing total returns.

Call assignment and upside capping. By selling calls (QYLD explicitly; QQQI via its derivative overlay), both funds cede gains above the strike price. In a strong bull market, especially a tech rally, these funds will lag a simple buy-and-hold Nasdaq-100 fund—income is paid at the cost of capital appreciation.

Limited track record for QQQI and tax-efficiency claims. QQQI launched in January 2024 and has not weathered a correction or tax year. Its claimed tax efficiency relative to QYLD is unproven and depends on how option-expiration timing and assignment flows actually play out in practice.

Option premium compression in low-volatility regimes. If implied volatility on Nasdaq-100 options falls, call premium shrinks, reducing the income both funds can generate each month. A sustained low-volatility environment would pressure both distributions below their current levels.

Bottom line

QQQI aims for higher income through a newer, more complex derivative structure; QYLD delivers slightly lower yield through a proven covered call mechanism over more than a decade. If maximum current income is the priority, QQQI's 14.42% distribution may appeal—but that comes with steeper NAV-erosion risk and an untested fund infrastructure. If steady, predictable income backed by a long track record and lower equity-like volatility matter more, QYLD's lower beta and maturity offer more reassurance. Neither fund captures full Nasdaq-100 upside; both sacrifice capital gains for monthly cash flow, a tradeoff that pays off only if distributions remain stable.

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