AMDY vs YMAX: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
AMDY and YMAX are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. AMDY is YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF, while YMAX is YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs. YMAX is broader by holdings count, with 30 positions versus 19 for AMDY. AMDY has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has YMAX ahead on AIQ Score, 42 versus 27.
What is the main difference between AMDY and YMAX?
AMDY and YMAX have little in common: 1% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | AMDY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 1% | 1.33% |
| Holdings | 19 | 30 |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 78.01% | 61.45% |
| Average volume | 371,316 | 1,280,024 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | -10% | -40.8% |
| YTD return | +13% | -26.5% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 58.6% | 25.9% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -42% | -42.7% |
| Beta | 2.72 | 1.62 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.05 | -2.03 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.07 | -3.01 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 27/100 | 42/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 1/10 | 2/10 |
| Momentum | 21/100 | 35/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 8/100 | 60/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF vs YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs
YMAX leads
YMAX leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 2 of 3 evidence groups support YMAX, and its lead is widening.
YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF
YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors YMAX over AMDY, 42 versus 27 as of Oct 21, 2026. YMAX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. YMAX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor YMAX today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. YMAX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF and YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
AMDY vs YMAX: 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 want | AMDY | YMAX | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 1% | 1.33% | AMDY |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 19 | 30 | YMAX |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 78.01% | 61.45% | AMDY |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -42% | -42.7% | Similar |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 58.6% | 25.9% | YMAX |
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.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
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 YMAX against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
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.
- Risk Resilience8 vs 60YMAX +52
- Momentum21 vs 35YMAX +14
- Quality42 vs 49YMAX +7
2 of 3 evidence groups favor YMAX. YMAX’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.
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.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
YMAX's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMDY and YMAX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
YMAX (YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
AMDY (YieldMax AMD Option Income Strategy ETF): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 39% against 23.7%.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | AMDY | YMAX | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 1% | 1.33% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 19 | 30 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 371,316 | 1,280,024 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 58.6% | 25.9% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -42% | -42.7% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.05 | -2.03 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 2.72 | 1.62 | Sensitivity 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.
How much of the same holdings they own
AMDY and YMAX share 0.89% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings.
5 holdings are unique to AMDY, and 28 holdings are unique to YMAX. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | AMDY | YMAX | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/2031 | 2.02% | 0.89% | 0.89% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What AMDY adds that YMAX doesn’t
| Holding | AMDY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| United States Treasury Bill 10/15/2026 | 17.63% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Bill 07/08/2027 | 16.24% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Bill 02/18/2027 | 14.43% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Bill 12/10/2026 | 13.62% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Note/Bond 2.375% 05/15/2027 | 12.85% | Not held |
| First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/2031 | 2.02% | 0.89% |
What YMAX adds that AMDY doesn’t
| Holding | YMAX | AMDY |
|---|---|---|
| SMCYYieldMax Smci Option Income Strategy ETF | 5.56% | Not held |
| GDXYYieldMax Gold Miners Option Income Strategy ETF | 5.52% | Not held |
| MSFOYieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF | 5.09% | Not held |
| GPTYYieldMax AI & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF | 5.07% | Not held |
| XOMOYieldMax Xom Option Income Strategy ETF | 4.74% | Not held |
| SNOYYieldMax SNOW Option Income Strategy ETF | 4.73% | 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 YMAX: five-year payout growth
AMDY began paying distributions in 2023, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare. YMAX began paying distributions in 2024, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.
| Dividend metric | AMDY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $30.699 | $7.674 |
| Peer rank | not ranked | not ranked |
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
2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor YMAX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | YMAX | 27 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | AMDY | Price vs 50-day -5.1% vs -2.1%; vs 200-day -1.9% vs -10.6% |
| Risk Resilience | YMAX | Risk Resilience 8 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMDY and YMAX and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
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 15 points. (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)
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 YMAX.
How the comparison changed
45 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 20YMAX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- YMAX +15
- 27 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- YMAX +12
- 29 vs 41
- 30 sessions ago
- YMAX +1
- 47 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Oct 9 when YMAX moved ahead of AMDY.
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.
2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only AMDY
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.48%)
- 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
0 bullish / 4 bearish
Only YMAX
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.17%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.4%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bearish Crossover.
AMDY is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
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).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.23%, AIQ +1 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.
- 1AMDY closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 52 points behind, the largest single contributor to YMAX's edge.
- 2AMDY's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3YMAX starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
Split across windows| Metric | AMDY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -13% | -3.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -18.7% | -7.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -20.4% | -2.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 10.8% | -13.4% |
| Year to date | 13% | -26.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -10% | -40.8% |
Technicals
AMDY has the stronger structure| Metric | AMDY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 24.1 | 41.7 |
| ADX (14) | 21.1 | 15.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.1% | -2.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1.9% | -10.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 39% | 23.7% |
Risk
YMAX is the more resilient| Metric | AMDY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.72 | 1.62 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.05 | -2.03 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.07 | -3.01 |
| Max drawdown | -42% | -42.7% |
| Current drawdown | -27.8% | -41.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 58.6% | 25.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.3% | -3% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between AMDY and YMAX?
AMDY and YMAX have little in common: 1% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do AMDY and YMAX overlap?
AMDY and YMAX share 0.89% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings. 5 holdings are unique to AMDY, and 28 holdings are unique to YMAX. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, AMDY or YMAX?
YMAX holds more positions: 30 versus 19 for AMDY.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
AMDY has the lower expense ratio, 1% a year against 1.33% for YMAX.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
AMDY, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 78.01% against 61.45% for YMAX.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
AMDY has been more volatile over the past year, at 58.6% annualized against 25.9% for YMAX.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past year are similar: -42% for AMDY and -42.7% for YMAX.
Compare AMDY and YMAX 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.