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.

Data updated September 18, 2026

Best for

ROKTInvestors who want broad equity exposure.
UFOInvestors who want broad equity exposure.

Jump to the side-by-side numbers

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.

ROKT has outpaced UFO over the trailing twelve months, posting a 44.95% total return against 24.86%. The lead holds up over 5 years too: ROKT has compounded at 22.19% a year, against 9.07% for UFO. ROKT has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 25.5% against 34.1% for UFO. 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.
Symbol	YTD	1Y	3Y	5Y	Since Apr 2019	Volatility	Sharpe	Sortino	Max drawdown
ROKT	19.58%	44.95%	38.07%	22.19%	18.78%	25.5%	1.09	1.64	-23.5%
UFO	7.30%	24.86%	36.47%	9.07%	9.07%	34.1%	0.78	1.18	-36.9%

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 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.

Side-by-side snapshot

Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric; each column is one fund.
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	$105.76 as of September 18, 2026	$43.21 as of September 18, 2026
Distribution rate	0.18%	0.27%
Distribution Safety Score™	78	45
Safety-Adjusted Yield	0.14%	0.12%
Expense ratio	0.45%	0.75%
AUM	$181M	$558M
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	1.46	1.9
Last dividend	$0.048	$0.058
Ex-dividend date	06/22/2026	06/29/2026

Bottom lineROKT and UFO are both for investors who want broad equity exposure — 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.

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.

State Street

ETFs179

Total AUM$2092B

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

State Street Global Advisors (SSGA) is one of the largest ETF providers globally, known for its flagship SPDR suite of exchange-traded products that serve both institutional and retail investors across a broad range of asset classes. 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.

See all State Street ETFs

Procure

ETFs1

Total AUM$558M

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. The firm currently operates a focused lineup of one fund, the UFO ETF, which concentrates on a specialized thematic strategy. 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.

See all Procure 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

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 offers the higher yield at 0.27% vs 0.18% for ROKT. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

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 ($558M), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.

Still deciding? Track ROKT & UFO 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.

Add to my watchlist See what a free account includes

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, ROKT would generate roughly $1.50/month, while UFO would produce $2.25/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay quarterly distributions.

ROKT yield0.18%

UFO yield0.27%

Monthly diff on $10K$0.75

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 1.46 for ROKT and 1.9 for UFO, making ROKT the less volatile of the two by this measure.

ROKT beta1.46

UFO beta1.9

Fund details

ROKT is managed by State Street (launched 10/19/2018) with $181M in assets. UFO is managed by Procure (launched 04/10/2019) with $558M in assets.

ROKT AUM$181M

UFO AUM$558M

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

What is the current distribution rate for ROKT and UFO?

ROKT currently distributes 0.18% and UFO 0.27%, based on fund data updated September 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout 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 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 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 — 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 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 78, UFO scores 45, so ROKT's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. ROKT has also shown lower price volatility (beta 1.46 vs 1.90 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 current rates, $10,000 in ROKT would generate roughly $1.50 per month ($18.00 annually). The same in UFO would produce about $2.25 per month ($27.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, ROKT or UFO?

More comparisons to explore

People also compare ROKT with

People also compare UFO with

Popular comparisons

ROKT vs UFO — at a glance

Generated September 19, 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 focused on space and frontier innovation, but they differ meaningfully in scope and risk profile. This difference in mandate shapes their leverage, concentration, and yield characteristics.

How they differ

The broadest distinction is scope: ROKT includes deep sea exposure alongside space, while UFO is pure-play space. That breadth shows up in risk—UFO carries a 1.9 beta versus 1.46 for ROKT, suggesting UFO amplifies market moves more sharply. UFO is also the larger fund by AUM ($558M vs. On yield, UFO offers 0.27% versus 0.18%, a modest premium that reflects its concentrated exposure.

Who each is best for

ROKT: Fits investors drawn to thematic innovation exposure but seeking lower volatility than pure-space plays, and who value the diversification that deep sea holdings provide alongside space-sector bets.

UFO: Designed for investors specifically bullish on commercial space activity and willing to accept higher market-correlated volatility in exchange for tighter focus and deeper liquidity in a larger fund.

Key risks to know

Narrow revenue dependence: Both funds rely on relatively few publicly traded companies with meaningful space or frontier-tech revenue; UFO's narrower mandate concentrates that risk further, creating sensitivity to setbacks in any single major player (SpaceX investors, Axiom Space, Blue Origin suppliers).

Thematic sector concentration: These funds exclude the broader economy. An extended pullback in venture funding, government space contracts, or launch costs could pressure holdings across both simultaneously, regardless of their different underlying indexes.

Higher beta volatility: UFO's 1.9 beta means a 20% market correction would historically correspond to a ~38% fund decline, versus ~29% for ROKT. Investors with shorter time horizons or lower loss tolerance should account for this drawdown profile.

Limited dividend sustainability: Both funds carry very low distribution rates (0.18% and 0.27%), indicating minimal current cash generation. Growth will depend on capital appreciation, not income, so holders should not expect yield to cushion downturns.

Nascent revenue streams: Many holdings are early-stage companies in infant markets (commercial spaceflight, space tourism, asteroid mining services). Revenue and profitability remain highly speculative and unproven at scale.

Bottom line

If you want broad exposure to innovation frontiers with moderately lower volatility and a smaller fee drag, ROKT's dual focus on space and deep sea may appeal; if you're specifically convicted on commercial space and comfortable with higher beta and fees for a more liquid, larger fund, UFO aligns with that conviction. Past performance doesn't predict future results, and both funds' small distributions mean they depend entirely on stock appreciation to generate returns.

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.

Start Free Open in Comparator Browse Screener