Two of the market's most popular income ETFs compared side-by-side. See which one fits your yield strategy.
What this means: Both MSFO and QDVO fall intoTier 4: Harvest. This suggests they share a similar risk profile and volatility expectation.
| Metric | MSFO | QDVO |
|---|---|---|
| Total Return (1Y) | 10.46% | 20.64% |
| NAV Change (1Y) | -15.05% | 9.37% |
| Max Drawdown | -25.26% | -26.52% |
| Beta | - | - |
* Returns include dividend reinvestment. Drawdown calculates peak-to-trough decline over trailing 12 months.
MSFO (YieldMax MSFT Option Income) is a options-based income fund managed by YieldMax. It focuses on generating income through strategic holdings. With $127.7M in assets under management, this fund has been operational since its inception.
Strategy: Generates enhanced income through covered call options on equity holdings, trading upside potential for premium income.
QDVO (Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF) is a options-based income fund managed by Amplify. It focuses on generating income through strategic holdings. With $553.3M in assets under management, this fund has been operational since its inception.
Strategy: Generates enhanced income through covered call options on equity holdings, trading upside potential for premium income.
In the head-to-head battle of MSFO vs QDVO, the choice depends on your specific goal. MSFO wins for Immediate Income with a 25.51% yield. However, QDVO is the better choice for Long-Term Growth due to superior total return performance.
Which fund is safer for retirement income? We analyze the yield sustainability and structural risk.
What is a Yield Trap? A yield trap occurs when a fund advertises an attractive headline yield (25.51% in MSFO's case), but that income is partially funded by Return of Capital (ROC) distributions rather than genuine earnings or realized gains. This means you're essentially receiving your own money back, while the fund's NAV erodes.
12-MONTH PERFORMANCE BREAKDOWN:
Why This Matters: For retirees withdrawing income, this creates a double-whammy effect:
⚖️ Verdict: MSFO exhibits classic yield trap characteristics. Income investors should allocate cautiously and consider pairing with capital-preserving assets (Tier 1-2 funds).
The Bottom Line Question: If you invest $100,000 today, how much cash will you actually receive each month? Here's the exact math:
MSFO
Annual Yield: 25.51%
$2,125/mo
($25,505/year)
Frequency: weekly
QDVO
Annual Yield: 11.27%
$939/mo
($11,272/year)
Frequency: monthly
Income Gap: MSFO generates $14,233/year more than QDVO on the same $100k investment.
Over 20 years, that's $284,661 in additional cash flow (before reinvestment).
Context Matters: Higher income doesn't always mean better investment. Review the "Yield Trap" and "Total Return" sections above—you want income that's sustainable, not just headline-grabbing.
Historical data reveals how these funds behave during market stress. QDVO has delivered a superior Total Return of 20.64% over the past year.
What is Max Drawdown? Max drawdown measures the largest peak-to-trough decline in portfolio value during a specific period. Unlike NAV change (which only looks at start vs. end), max drawdown captures the worst moment of pain an investor experienced.
Real-World Scenario: $100,000 Investment
MSFO (More Resilient)
Max Drawdown: -25.26%
-$25,260
Worst unrealized loss
QDVO (More Volatile)
Max Drawdown: -26.52%
-$26,520
Worst unrealized loss
Protection Value: MSFO saved investors $1,260 in drawdown severity on a $100k position.
Why This Matters More Than Total Return: During bear markets or corrections, investors with lower max drawdown are:
⚖️ Capital Preservation Winner: MSFO demonstrated superior downside protection, making it the better choice for retirees who cannot afford steep temporary losses.
What is an Expense Ratio? The annual fee charged by the fund, expressed as a percentage of assets. It's deducted daily from the fund's NAV, making it invisible to most investors—but it compounds over time.
QDVO (LOWER COST)
0.550%
Annual expense ratio
MSFO (HIGHER COST)
1.070%
Annual expense ratio
20-YEAR FEE IMPACT SIMULATION ($100,000 INITIAL INVESTMENT)
The Hidden Cost of "Just 0.52%": That seemingly small difference of 0.520% annually becomes $10,400 in lost wealth over 20 years. Factor in compound growth, and you're giving up ~$27,208 in potential portfolio value.
💡 Cost Efficiency Winner: QDVO is the clear winner for long-term buy-and-hold investors. Lower fees mean more capital compounds in YOUR account, not the fund manager's.
Every investor has a unique risk profile. Use our Portfolio Intelligence tool to see the impact of adding these ETFs to your holdings.