ROKT
Caution
High confidence
ETF Comparison
ROKT vs UFO: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF and Procure Space ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 6, 2026
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Best for
- ROKTInvestors who want targeted space-industry exposure and accept its concentration.
- UFOInvestors who want targeted space-industry exposure and accept its concentration.
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.
UFO
Caution
Limited data
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  ROKT |  UFO |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF | Procure Space ETF |
| Issuer | State Street | Procure |
| Underlying index | S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index | S-Network Space Index |
| Last Close | $96.55 as of November 6, 2026 | $39.01 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | 0.21% | 0.04% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | 0.22% | 0.39% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | 55 | 40 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | 0.12% | 0.02% |
| Expense ratio | 0.45% | 0.75% |
| AUM | $150M | $457M |
| Distribution frequency | Quarterly | Quarterly |
| Objective | Tracks the S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index, providing exposure to companies driving innovation in deep space and deep sea frontiers. | Tracks the S-Network Space Index, providing exposure to companies that derive significant revenue from space-related business activities. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 10/19/2018 | 04/10/2019 |
| Beta | 1.49 | 1.87 |
| Last dividend | $0.051 | $0.004 |
| Ex-dividend date | 09/21/2026 | 09/29/2026 |
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.
ROKT has outpaced UFO over the trailing twelve months, posting a 18.43% total return against 4.06%. The lead holds up over 5 years too: ROKT has compounded at 17.94% a year, against 5.25% for UFO. ROKT has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 26.0% against 34.4% for UFO. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | 1Y cumulative | 3Y annualized | 5Y annualized | Since Apr 2019 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROKT | 9.76% | 18.43% | 32.92% | 17.94% | 16.48% | 26.0% | 0.94 | 1.38 | -31.7% |
| UFO | -3.60% | 4.06% | 32.35% | 5.25% | 6.78% | 34.4% | 0.70 | 1.05 | -45.0% |
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 Apr 2019” measures every fund from April 11, 2019 — 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.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Bottom lineROKT and UFO are both for investors who want targeted space-industry exposure and accept its concentration — so strategy isn't the deciding factor here. Cost is: ROKT charges 0.45% against 0.75% for UFO, and between two funds this similar that gap comes straight out of your return every year you hold.
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs186
Total AUM$2.15T
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Their 88-fund lineup spans diverse strategies including sector exposure (Select Sector SPDR), income generation (Income and Select Sector SPDR Premium Income families), commodities (including the widely-held GLD gold ETF), bonds, ESG-focused investments, and thematic allocations, with popular tickers like DIA (Diamonds Trust), FEZ (Eurozone exposure), and JNK (high-yield bonds) among their most recognized funds. The issuer is characterized by its comprehensive coverage across multiple market segments and its emphasis on both traditional index-based products and specialized strategies like covered call income funds and factor-based investing.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on ROKT.
ETFs1
Total AUM$457M
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Procure is known for offering thematic ETFs that target specific investment trends and sectors. This niche approach allows investors seeking targeted exposure to particular market themes rather than broad-based diversification.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on UFO.
Quick verdict
ROKT (SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF) and UFO (Procure Space ETF) are both quarterly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.
UFO has paid the higher yield over the past 12 months, 0.39% vs 0.22% for ROKT. We compare trailing 12-month yields here because UFO's latest distribution annualizes to 0.04% against 0.39% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income.
ROKT is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.45% compared to 0.75%.
They have different reference exposures: ROKT is linked to S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index while UFO is linked to S-Network Space Index, which means their performance drivers differ.
UFO is the larger fund by assets ($457M), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
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.
1 shared position
ROKT 4.2% of its top-10 weight
UFO 3.2% of its top-10 weight
| Position | ROKT | UFO |
|---|---|---|
| LMT Lockheed Martin Corporation |
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at the rates paid over the past 12 months, ROKT would pay about $22.00 a year (about $5.50 per quarterly distribution on average), while UFO would pay about $39.00 a year (about $9.75 per quarterly distribution on average). Both pay quarterly distributions.
ROKT 12-month yield0.22%
UFO 12-month yield0.39%
Annual cash diff on $10K$17.00
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, ROKT would cost approximately $450 in fees vs $750 for UFO (simplified, not compounded). The $300.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
ROKT ER0.45%
UFO ER0.75%
Strategy & risk
ROKT tracks S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index, while UFO tracks S-Network Space Index. Beta is 1.49 for ROKT and 1.87 for UFO, making ROKT the less sensitive to market moves of the two by this measure.
ROKT beta1.49
UFO beta1.87
Fund details
ROKT is managed by State Street (launched 10/19/2018) with $150M in assets. UFO is managed by Procure (launched 04/10/2019) with $457M in assets.
ROKT AUM$150M
UFO AUM$457M
Frequently asked questions
What is the current distribution rate for ROKT and UFO?
Over the past 12 months ROKT paid 0.22% and UFO 0.39%, based on fund data updated November 2026. We compare trailing 12-month yields here because UFO's latest distribution annualizes to 0.04% against 0.39% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income. Yields move with both the payouts and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.
Is ROKT or UFO better for dividend income?
It depends on your goals. UFO has paid the higher trailing 12-month yield (0.39% vs 0.22%). We compare trailing 12-month yields here because UFO's latest distribution annualizes to 0.04% against 0.39% 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 ROKT and UFO?
ROKT (SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF) tracks S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index, while UFO (Procure Space ETF) tracks S-Network Space Index. They are issued by State Street and Procure respectively.
Can I hold both ROKT and UFO?
Yes. Their disclosed top-10 holdings share only 1 position, so combining both adds mostly distinct underlying names — see the holdings-overlap section above. Overlap outside the disclosed top 10 can still exist.
Is ROKT or UFO safer?
By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — ROKT scores 55, UFO scores 40, so ROKT's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. ROKT has also been less sensitive to market moves (beta 1.49 vs 1.87 for UFO). No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.
Which has lower fees, ROKT or UFO?
ROKT has an expense ratio of 0.45% while UFO charges 0.75%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in ROKT vs UFO generate?
At the rates paid over the past 12 months, $10,000 in ROKT would pay about $22.00 a year (about $5.50 per quarterly distribution on average). $10,000 in UFO would pay about $39.00 a year (about $9.75 per quarterly distribution on average).
Which has performed better historically, ROKT or UFO?
ROKT has outpaced UFO over the trailing twelve months, posting a 18.43% total return against 4.06%. The lead holds up over 5 years too: ROKT has compounded at 17.94% a year, against 5.25% for UFO. ROKT has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 26.0% against 34.4% for UFO. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare ROKT with
People also compare UFO with
Popular comparisons
ROKT vs UFO — 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
ROKT and UFO are both equity ETFs tracking indexes of space-frontier companies, but they differ in scope and cost structure. The funds occupy different niches within the emerging space economy theme.
How they differ
The biggest difference is breadth: ROKT includes deep sea exposure alongside space, giving it a wider investment universe than UFO's space-specific mandate. On yield, ROKT distributes at 0.21% versus 0.04% for UFO—a minimal practical difference, as both funds emphasize capital appreciation over income. Beta reveals different market sensitivity: ROKT's 1.49 beta suggests 1.49-times the sensitivity to broad market moves that UFO's 1.87 indicates—a meaningful gap favoring ROKT for investors seeking less volatility within the space-economy theme.
Who each is best for
- ROKT: Fits investors interested in a broader frontier-innovation thesis that encompasses both space and ocean exploration, with a preference for lower fees and lower market beta relative to UFO.
- UFO: Designed for investors wanting pure-play exposure to space economy revenue generators and willing to accept a higher expense ratio and market sensitivity in exchange for a tighter thematic focus.
Key risks to know
- Concentrated thematic exposure: Both funds bet heavily on the space economy's growth and commercialization. If government spending or private investment in space slows, or if regulatory hurdles delay projects, both could face sustained underperformance regardless of broader market conditions.
- Higher-beta volatility: UFO's 1.87 beta and ROKT's 1.49 beta both exceed the market average, meaning both funds will likely amplify downturns in equity markets. During corrections, these funds may decline more sharply than the S&P 500.
- Early-stage business risk: Space and deep-sea companies are often in development or early commercialization phases. Earnings are uncertain, profitability timelines are speculative, and individual holdings may face technical failures or funding challenges that could surprise investors.
- Index methodology drift: ROKT's broad mandate (space and sea) may shift its holdings or sector weights if index rules change or if sea-frontier companies grow faster than space ones, potentially moving the fund away from a pure space theme.
Bottom line
If you want lower fees and broader frontier exposure (space plus deep sea), ROKT stands out; if you prefer pure-play space economy focus and accept higher costs and volatility, UFO's tighter index fit may appeal. Neither fund is optimized for income—both yield under 0.25%—so both suit growth-oriented portfolios. Past performance in emerging themes like space doesn't predict future results, and both funds remain speculative bets on commercialization timelines that may extend well beyond current expectations.
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.