CHPY vs FEPI: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
CHPY and FEPI are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. CHPY is YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF, while FEPI is REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF. CHPY is broader by holdings count, with 94 positions versus 66 for FEPI. FEPI is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has FEPI ahead on AIQ Score, 42 versus 33.
What is the main difference between CHPY and FEPI?
CHPY and FEPI have little in common: 26% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | CHPY | FEPI |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 1.03% | 0.65% |
| Holdings | 94 | 66 |
| Top-10 concentration | 48.1% | 66.5% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 45.74% | 26.4% |
| Average volume | 700,213 | 201,586 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +5.8% | -12.2% |
| YTD return | +9.2% | -9% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 40.3% | 20.6% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -32.9% | -23.3% |
| Beta | 2.30 | 1.30 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.24 | -0.75 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.34 | -1.14 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 33/100 | 42/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 1/10 | 2/10 |
| Momentum | 21/100 | 29/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 28/100 | 75/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF vs REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF
FEPI leads
FEPI leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 5 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 4 evidence groups support FEPI, and its lead is widening.
YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF
REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors FEPI over CHPY, 42 versus 33 as of Oct 21, 2026. FEPI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while CHPY holds the stronger quality profile. FEPI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor FEPI today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. FEPI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF and REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
CHPY vs FEPI: 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 | CHPY | FEPI | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 1.03% | 0.65% | FEPI |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 94 | 66 | CHPY |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 48.1% | 66.5% | CHPY |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 45.74% | 26.4% | CHPY |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -32.9% | -23.3% | FEPI |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 40.3% | 20.6% | FEPI |
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 CHPY and FEPI 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 Resilience28 vs 75FEPI +47
- Momentum21 vs 29FEPI +8
- Value27 vs 33FEPI +6
- Quality50 vs 45CHPY +5
4 of 4 evidence groups favor FEPI. FEPI’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.
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
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 5 active signals are unchanged.
FEPI's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CHPY and FEPI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
FEPI (REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income 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 17.4%.
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 | CHPY | FEPI | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 1.03% | 0.65% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 94 | 66 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 700,213 | 201,586 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 40.3% | 20.6% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -32.9% | -23.3% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.24 | -0.75 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 2.30 | 1.30 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
How much of the same holdings they own
CHPY and FEPI share 25.81% of their weighted exposure across 5 common holdings.
24 holdings are unique to CHPY, and 18 holdings are unique to FEPI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
FEPI is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 66.52% of the fund, against 48.1% for CHPY (66 holdings vs 94). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | CHPY | FEPI | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA CORP | 6.1% | 6.25% | 6.1% |
| AMDADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC | 5.3% | 6.64% | 5.3% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc. | 5% | 5.96% | 5% |
| INTCINTEL CORP | 4.72% | 6.58% | 4.72% |
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY INC | 4.68% | 6.6% | 4.68% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What CHPY adds that FEPI doesn’t
| Holding | CHPY | FEPI |
|---|---|---|
| MRVLMARVELL TECHNOLOGY INC | 5.27% | Not held |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 4.85% | Not held |
| UMCUnited Microelectronics Corp | 4.39% | Not held |
| ASMLASML Holding NV | 3.9% | Not held |
| ASXASE Technology Holding Co Ltd | 3.88% | Not held |
| ALABAstera Labs Inc | 3.72% | Not held |
What FEPI adds that CHPY doesn’t
| Holding | FEPI | CHPY |
|---|---|---|
| METAMETA PLATFORMS INC | 7.37% | Not held |
| TSLATesla Inc. | 6.79% | Not held |
| ORCLORACLE CORP | 6.67% | Not held |
| SNDKSANDISK CORP/DE SNDKV | 6.61% | Not held |
| AAPLAPPLE INC | 6.6% | Not held |
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORP | 6.41% | 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.
CHPY vs FEPI: five-year payout growth
CHPY began paying distributions in 2025, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare. FEPI began paying distributions in 2023, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.
| Dividend metric | CHPY | FEPI |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $15.679 | $11.608 |
| 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
4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor FEPI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | FEPI | 33 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | FEPI | Value 27 vs 33 |
| Technicals | FEPI | Price vs 50-day -9.3% vs -2.1%; vs 200-day -10.2% vs -3% |
| Risk Resilience | FEPI | Risk Resilience 28 vs 75 |
| 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 CHPY and FEPI 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 moderate at 9 points.
- 4 of 4 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 FEPI.
How the comparison changed
45 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 20FEPI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- FEPI +9
- 33 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- FEPI +10
- 32 vs 42
- 30 sessions ago
- FEPI +5
- 44 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
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.
1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted
Only CHPY
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral
Only FEPI
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Keltner Channel Breakdown, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
CHPY 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 +0.87%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.22%, 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.
- 1CHPY closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 47 points behind, the largest single contributor to FEPI's edge.
- 2CHPY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3FEPI 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
FEPI leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CHPY | FEPI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -8.4% | -4.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -14.7% | -4.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -18.2% | 0.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -6% | -3.9% |
| Year to date | 9.2% | -9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 5.8% | -12.2% |
Technicals
FEPI has the stronger structure| Metric | CHPY | FEPI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 20.6 | 36.4 |
| ADX (14) | 23.6 | 20.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.3% | -2.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -10.2% | -3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 27.8% | 17.4% |
Risk
FEPI is the more resilient| Metric | CHPY | FEPI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.3 | 1.3 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.24 | -0.75 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.34 | -1.14 |
| Max drawdown | -32.9% | -23.3% |
| Current drawdown | -32.1% | -16.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 40.3% | 20.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.3% | -2.2% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between CHPY and FEPI?
CHPY and FEPI have little in common: 26% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do CHPY and FEPI overlap?
CHPY and FEPI share 25.81% of their weighted exposure across 5 common holdings. 24 holdings are unique to CHPY, and 18 holdings are unique to FEPI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, CHPY or FEPI?
CHPY holds more positions: 94 versus 66 for FEPI.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
FEPI has the lower expense ratio, 0.65% a year against 1.03% for CHPY.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
CHPY, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 45.74% against 26.4% for FEPI.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
CHPY has been more volatile over the past year, at 40.3% annualized against 20.6% for FEPI.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
FEPI fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -23.3% against -32.9% for CHPY.
Compare CHPY and FEPI 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.