AMDY vs VOO: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

AMDY and VOO are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. AMDY is YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF, while VOO is Vanguard S&P 500 ETF. VOO is broader by holdings count, with 508 positions versus 19 for AMDY. VOO has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VOO ahead on AIQ Score, 64 versus 27.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
AMDY
YieldMax
vs
VOO
Vanguard
AMDY
YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF
Issuer
YieldMax
Inception
2023-09-18
VOO
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2010-09-07

What is the main difference between AMDY and VOO?

VOO holds 508 positions to AMDY's 19, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
AMDY
1%
VOO
0.03%
Lower annual fund costVOO
Holdings
AMDY
19
VOO
508
Broader reported basketVOO
1Y return
AMDY
-10%
VOO
+16.4%
Trailing performanceVOO
Annualized volatility
AMDY
58.6%
VOO
12.8%
Lower realized volatilityVOO
MetricAMDYVOO
Fund
Expense ratio1%0.03%
Holdings19508
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months78.01%1.05%
Average volume371,3167,814,237
Performance
1Y return-10%+16.4%
YTD return+13%+12.7%
Risk
Annualized volatility58.6%12.8%
Max drawdown (1Y)-42%-9.2%
Beta2.721.00
Sharpe ratio0.050.91
Sortino ratio0.071.38
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score27/10064/100
AIQ Edge Score1/109/10
Momentum21/10064/100
Risk Resilience8/10087/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Coverage 63/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictStableAIQ Comparison Conviction 10/10

VOO leads

VOO leads by 37 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 17 points over 30 sessions.

Stable: 3 of 3 evidence groups support VOO, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 3 of 3Comparison trend: Strengthening
AMDY

YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF

AIQ Score
27/100
AIQ Edge Score
1/10
VOO

Vanguard S&P 500 ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
64/100
AIQ Edge Score
9/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VOO over AMDY, 64 versus 27 as of Oct 21, 2026. VOO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. VOO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VOO today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. VOO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 37 points over 30 sessions.

Compare YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

AMDY vs VOO: which fits what

Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.

If you wantAMDYVOOFits
Lower costExpense ratio1%0.03%VOO
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings19508VOO
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield78.01%1.05%AMDY
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year-42%-9.2%VOO
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year58.6%12.8%VOO

Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

AMDY
+231.3%
VOO
+80.5%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

AMDY $33,129 · VOO $18,049

Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.

Compare AMDY and VOO against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

AIQ Factor Divergence

Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.

AMDY advantage
0
VOO advantage
  • Risk Resilience8 vs 87
    VOO +79
  • Momentum21 vs 64
    VOO +43
  • Quality42 vs 77
    VOO +35

3 of 3 evidence groups favor VOO. VOO’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.

AMDY0 AIQ

Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.

VOO+4 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +17

New signals

  • Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon

VOO's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMDY and VOO both carry a full feed there.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasureAMDYVOOWhy it matters
Expense ratio1%0.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings19508More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume371,3167,814,237Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility58.6%12.8%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-42%-9.2%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio0.050.91Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta2.721.00Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio.

Where the exposure actually sits

Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.

Cash & Others100.0% vs 0.0%
Technology0.0% vs 38.7%
Financial Services0.0% vs 12.0%
Communication Services0.0% vs 9.5%
Consumer Cyclical0.0% vs 9.3%
Healthcare0.0% vs 9.3%
Industrials0.0% vs 7.8%
Consumer Defensive0.0% vs 4.5%
AMDYVOO

How much of the same holdings they own

AMDY and VOO share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.

6 holdings are unique to AMDY, and 505 holdings are unique to VOO. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

What AMDY adds that VOO doesn’t

HoldingAMDYVOO
United States Treasury Bill 10/15/202617.63%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 07/08/202716.24%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 02/18/202714.43%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 12/10/202613.62%Not held
United States Treasury Note/Bond 2.375% 05/15/202712.85%Not held
First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/20312.02%Not held

What VOO adds that AMDY doesn’t

HoldingVOOAMDY
NVDANVIDIA Corp7.55%Not held
AAPLApple Inc7.05%Not held
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.36%Not held
AMZNAmazon.com Inc4.13%Not held
GOOGLAlphabet Inc3.24%Not held
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.86%Not held

Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.

AMDY vs VOO: five-year payout growth

VOO grew its split-adjusted payout at 5.91% a year over 2020-2025. AMDY began paying distributions in 2023, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.

Dividend metricAMDYVOO
2025 annual payout$30.699$7.068
Peer ranknot ranked#88 of 138

Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VOO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreVOO27 vs 64
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsVOOPrice vs 50-day -5.1% vs 0.6%; vs 200-day -1.9% vs 5.9%
Risk ResilienceVOORisk Resilience 8 vs 87
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMDY and VOO and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Stable

The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.

  • The AIQ gap is wide at 37 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • 3 of 3 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)

Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on VOO.

How the comparison changed

99 daily snapshots · Jun 22 – Oct 20

VOO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 37 points over 30 sessions.

Jun 22AMDY leads above the line · VOO leads belowOct 20
Today
VOO +37
27 vs 64
7 sessions ago
VOO +34
29 vs 63
30 sessions ago
VOO +17
47 vs 64
90 sessions ago
VOO +38
30 vs 68

The lead has not changed hands in this window.

AIQ Signal Divergence

Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.

AMDYConflicted

2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

Only AMDY

  • ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.85%)
  • Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
  • RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
  • Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
VOOConflicted

4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

Only VOO

  • ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.93%)
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.2%)
  • Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon

Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.

VOO leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.

Price vs model alignment

Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.

AMDYNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +3.05%, AIQ 0 points).

VOOConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.55%, AIQ +4 points).

What would flip this result

A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.

  1. 1AMDY closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 79 points behind, the largest single contributor to VOO's edge.
  2. 2AMDY's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
  3. 3VOO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
  4. 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.

The full evidence

Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.

Performance

VOO leads 4 of 6 windows
MetricAMDYVOO
1 week (5 sessions)-13%-1.2%
1 month (20 sessions)-18.7%-0.8%
3 months (63 sessions)-20.4%2.9%
6 months (126 sessions)10.8%9.2%
Year to date13%12.7%
1 year (252 sessions)-10%16.4%

Technicals

VOO has the stronger structure
MetricAMDYVOO
RSI (14)24.156.2
ADX (14)21.112.3
Price vs 50-day-5.1%0.6%
Price vs 200-day-1.9%5.9%
Volatility (1M, annualized)39%9.4%

Risk

VOO is the more resilient
MetricAMDYVOO
Beta2.721
Sharpe ratio0.050.91
Sortino ratio0.071.38
Max drawdown-42%-9.2%
Current drawdown-27.8%-1.3%
Annualized volatility58.6%12.8%
Value at risk (95%)-5.3%-1.4%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between AMDY and VOO?

VOO holds 508 positions to AMDY's 19, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do AMDY and VOO overlap?

AMDY and VOO share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 6 holdings are unique to AMDY, and 505 holdings are unique to VOO. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, AMDY or VOO?

VOO holds more positions: 508 versus 19 for AMDY.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VOO has the lower expense ratio, 0.03% a year against 1% for AMDY.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

AMDY, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 78.01% against 1.05% for VOO.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

AMDY has been more volatile over the past year, at 58.6% annualized against 12.8% for VOO.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

VOO fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -9.2% against -42% for AMDY.

Compare AMDY and VOO with others

Continue your research

This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.

How this comparison is scored

The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.

The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.

How to use side-by-side comparison →

This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.