AMZY vs CHPY: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

AMZY and CHPY are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. AMZY is YieldMax AMZN Option Income Strategy ETF, while CHPY is YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF. CHPY is broader by holdings count, with 94 positions versus 15 for AMZY. CHPY has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has AMZY ahead on AIQ Score, 50 versus 33.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
AMZY
YieldMax
vs
CHPY
YieldMax
AMZY
YieldMax AMZN Option Income Strategy ETF
Issuer
YieldMax
Inception
2023-07-24
CHPY
YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF
Issuer
YieldMax
Inception
2025-04-02

What is the main difference between AMZY and CHPY?

CHPY holds 94 positions to AMZY's 15, and 1% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
AMZY
1.09%
CHPY
1.03%
Lower annual fund costCHPY
Holdings
AMZY
15
CHPY
94
Broader reported basketCHPY
1Y return
AMZY
-24%
CHPY
+5.8%
Trailing performanceCHPY
Annualized volatility
AMZY
28.1%
CHPY
40.3%
Lower realized volatilityAMZY
MetricAMZYCHPY
Fund
Expense ratio1.09%1.03%
Holdings1594
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months47.65%45.74%
Average volume283,910700,213
Performance
1Y return-24%+5.8%
YTD return-21%+9.2%
Risk
Annualized volatility28.1%40.3%
Max drawdown (1Y)-34.8%-32.9%
Beta1.162.30
Sharpe ratio-0.960.24
Sortino ratio-1.560.34
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score50/10033/100
AIQ Edge Score4/101/10
Momentum48/10021/100
Risk Resilience68/10028/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

YieldMax AMZN Option Income Strategy ETF vs YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Options Income / Covered Call· Coverage 59/66 fields· Moderate confidence
AIQ VerdictStableAIQ Comparison Conviction 9/10

AMZY leads

AMZY leads by 17 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions.

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

Evidence agreement: 3 of 3Comparison trend: Strengthening
AMZY

YieldMax AMZN Option Income Strategy ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
50/100
AIQ Edge Score
4/10
CHPY

YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF

AIQ Score
33/100
AIQ Edge Score
1/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AMZY over CHPY, 50 versus 33 as of Oct 21, 2026. AMZY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while CHPY holds the stronger quality profile. AMZY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor AMZY today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. AMZY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 17 points over 30 sessions.

Compare YieldMax AMZN Option Income Strategy ETF and YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

AMZY vs CHPY: 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 wantAMZYCHPYFits
Lower costExpense ratio1.09%1.03%CHPY
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings1594CHPY
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield47.65%45.74%AMZY
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year-34.8%-32.9%Similar
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year28.1%40.3%AMZY

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.

AMZY
+38.2%
CHPY
+148.8%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

AMZY $13,822 · CHPY $24,876

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

Compare AMZY and CHPY 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.

AMZY advantage
0
CHPY advantage
  • Risk Resilience68 vs 28
    AMZY +40
  • Momentum48 vs 21
    AMZY +27
  • Quality42 vs 50
    CHPY +8

3 of 3 evidence groups favor AMZY. AMZY’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; CHPY keeps a meaningful quality edge.

What changed since the last close

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

AMZY0 AIQ

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

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.

CHPY0 AIQ

Largest factor move: Value -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.

New signals

  • Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.10%)
  • Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon

AMZY's lead was unchanged in the latest session.

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

The central trade-off

AMZY (YieldMax AMZN Option Income Strategy ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.

CHPY (YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF): the counter-case, on quality — but at materially higher volatility, 27.8% against 22.3%.

Fund facts, side by side

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

MeasureAMZYCHPYWhy it matters
Expense ratio1.09%1.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings1594More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume283,910700,213Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility28.1%40.3%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-34.8%-32.9%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio-0.960.24Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta1.162.30Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio.

How much of the same holdings they own

AMZY and CHPY share 0.82% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings.

5 holdings are unique to AMZY, and 28 holdings are unique to CHPY. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Largest shared positions

HoldingAMZYCHPYShared
First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/20312.67%0.82%0.82%

Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.

What AMZY adds that CHPY doesn’t

HoldingAMZYCHPY
United States Treasury Note/Bond 2.375% 05/15/202724.9%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 07/08/202720.64%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 02/18/202717.14%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 12/10/202611.59%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 10/15/20269.85%Not held
First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/20312.67%0.82%

What CHPY adds that AMZY doesn’t

HoldingCHPYAMZY
NVDANVIDIA Corp6.1%Not held
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc5.3%Not held
MRVLMARVELL TECHNOLOGY INC5.27%Not held
AVGOBroadcom Inc5%Not held
LRCXLam Research Corp4.85%Not held
INTCIntel Corp4.72%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.

AMZY vs CHPY: five-year payout growth

AMZY began paying distributions in 2023, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare. CHPY began paying distributions in 2025, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.

Dividend metricAMZYCHPY
2025 annual payout$6.984$15.679
Peer ranknot rankednot 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

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

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreAMZY50 vs 33
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsAMZYPrice vs 50-day -0.7% vs -9.3%; vs 200-day -8.1% vs -10.2%
Risk ResilienceAMZYRisk Resilience 68 vs 28
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMZY and CHPY 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 17 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 AMZY.

How the comparison changed

45 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 20

AMZY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 17 points over 30 sessions.

Sep 6AMZY leads above the line · CHPY leads belowOct 20
Today
AMZY +17
50 vs 33
7 sessions ago
AMZY +16
48 vs 32
30 sessions ago
AMZY +1
45 vs 44
90 sessions ago
Not covered

The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 25 when AMZY moved ahead of CHPY.

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.

AMZYConflicted

1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted

Only AMZY

  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
CHPYConflicted

1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted

Only CHPY

  • Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
  • RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon

Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active.

AMZY 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.

AMZYNo material change

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

CHPYNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.87%, AIQ 0 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. 1CHPY closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMZY's edge.
  2. 2CHPY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
  3. 3AMZY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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

Split across windows
MetricAMZYCHPY
1 week (5 sessions)0.3%-8.4%
1 month (20 sessions)0%-14.7%
3 months (63 sessions)-2.4%-18.2%
6 months (126 sessions)-15.1%-6%
Year to date-21%9.2%
1 year (252 sessions)-24%5.8%

Technicals

AMZY has the stronger structure
MetricAMZYCHPY
RSI (14)5720.6
ADX (14)1223.6
Price vs 50-day-0.7%-9.3%
Price vs 200-day-8.1%-10.2%
Volatility (1M, annualized)22.3%27.8%

Risk

AMZY is the more resilient
MetricAMZYCHPY
Beta1.162.3
Sharpe ratio-0.960.24
Sortino ratio-1.560.34
Max drawdown-34.8%-32.9%
Current drawdown-31.5%-32.1%
Annualized volatility28.1%40.3%
Value at risk (95%)-2.7%-4.3%

Straight answers

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

What is the difference between AMZY and CHPY?

CHPY holds 94 positions to AMZY's 15, and 1% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do AMZY and CHPY overlap?

AMZY and CHPY share 0.82% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings. 5 holdings are unique to AMZY, and 28 holdings are unique to CHPY. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, AMZY or CHPY?

CHPY holds more positions: 94 versus 15 for AMZY.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

CHPY has the lower expense ratio, 1.03% a year against 1.09% for AMZY.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

AMZY, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 47.65% against 45.74% for CHPY.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

CHPY has been more volatile over the past year, at 40.3% annualized against 28.1% for AMZY.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past year are similar: -34.8% for AMZY and -32.9% for CHPY.

Compare AMZY and CHPY 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.