CHPY vs TSLY: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

CHPY and TSLY are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. CHPY is YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF, while TSLY is YieldMax TSLA Option Income Strategy ETF. CHPY is broader by holdings count, with 94 positions versus 15 for TSLY. CHPY has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has TSLY ahead on AIQ Score, 46 versus 33.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
CHPY
YieldMax
vs
TSLY
YieldMax
CHPY
YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF
Issuer
YieldMax
Inception
2025-04-02
TSLY
YieldMax TSLA Option Income Strategy ETF
Issuer
YieldMax
Inception
2022-11-22

What is the main difference between CHPY and TSLY?

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

Expense ratio
CHPY
1.03%
TSLY
1.07%
Lower annual fund costCHPY
Holdings
CHPY
94
TSLY
15
Broader reported basketCHPY
1Y return
CHPY
+5.8%
TSLY
-47%
Trailing performanceCHPY
Annualized volatility
CHPY
40.3%
TSLY
38.5%
Lower realized volatilityTSLY
MetricCHPYTSLY
Fund
Expense ratio1.03%1.07%
Holdings9415
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months45.74%81.23%
Average volume700,213480,979
Performance
1Y return+5.8%-47%
YTD return+9.2%-42.1%
Risk
Annualized volatility40.3%38.5%
Max drawdown (1Y)-32.9%-52.7%
Beta2.301.87
Sharpe ratio0.24-1.62
Sortino ratio0.34-2.17
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score33/10046/100
AIQ Edge Score1/103/10
Momentum21/10043/100
Risk Resilience28/10047/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

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

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Options Income / Covered Call· Coverage 59/66 fields· Moderate confidence
AIQ VerdictCompetitiveAIQ Comparison Conviction 6/10

TSLY leads

TSLY leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from CHPY.

Competitive: 2 of 3 evidence groups support TSLY, and the lead recently changed hands.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 3Comparison trend: Reversed
CHPY

YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF

AIQ Score
33/100
AIQ Edge Score
1/10
TSLY

YieldMax TSLA Option Income Strategy ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
46/100
AIQ Edge Score
3/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TSLY over CHPY, 46 versus 33 as of Oct 21, 2026. TSLY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience. TSLY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor TSLY today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. TSLY lead: Reversed — CHPY led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TSLY now leads by 13.

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

CHPY vs TSLY: 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 wantCHPYTSLYFits
Lower costExpense ratio1.03%1.07%CHPY
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings9415CHPY
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield45.74%81.23%TSLY
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year-32.9%-52.7%CHPY
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year40.3%38.5%TSLY

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.

CHPY
+148.8%
TSLY
+42.4%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

CHPY $24,876 · TSLY $14,244

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 TSLY 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.

CHPY advantage
0
TSLY advantage
  • Momentum21 vs 43
    TSLY +22
  • Risk Resilience28 vs 47
    TSLY +19
  • Quality50 vs 47
    Even

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

What changed since the last close

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

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
TSLY+2 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +2

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.

TSLY's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.

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

The central trade-off

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

CHPY (YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF): the counter-case, on technicals.

Fund facts, side by side

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

MeasureCHPYTSLYWhy it matters
Expense ratio1.03%1.07%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings9415More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume700,213480,979Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility40.3%38.5%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-32.9%-52.7%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio0.24-1.62Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta2.301.87Sensitivity 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 TSLY share 0.82% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings.

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

Largest shared positions

HoldingCHPYTSLYShared
First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/20310.82%1.89%0.82%

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 TSLY doesn’t

HoldingCHPYTSLY
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

What TSLY adds that CHPY doesn’t

HoldingTSLYCHPY
United States Treasury Note/Bond 2.375% 05/15/202720.24%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 10/15/202619.45%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 12/10/202618.22%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 02/18/202712.48%Not held
United States Treasury Bill 07/08/202712.02%Not held
First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/20311.89%0.82%

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 TSLY: five-year payout growth

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

Dividend metricCHPYTSLY
2025 annual payout$15.679$34.231
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

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

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreTSLY33 vs 46
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsCHPYPrice vs 50-day -9.3% vs 0.9%; vs 200-day -10.2% vs -22.5%
Risk ResilienceTSLYRisk Resilience 28 vs 47
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

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

AIQ Decision Stability

Competitive

The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.

  • The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 TSLY.

How the comparison changed

45 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 20

TSLY lead: Reversed — CHPY led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TSLY now leads by 13.

Sep 6CHPY leads above the line · TSLY leads belowOct 20
Today
TSLY +13
33 vs 46
7 sessions ago
TSLY +10
32 vs 42
30 sessions ago
CHPY +4
44 vs 40
90 sessions ago
Not covered

The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Oct 2 when TSLY 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.

CHPYConflicted

1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted

Only CHPY

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

0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral

Only TSLY

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon

Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, 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.

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).

TSLYConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.76%, AIQ +2 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 Momentum gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSLY's edge.
  2. 2CHPY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
  3. 3TSLY starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
  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
MetricCHPYTSLY
1 week (5 sessions)-8.4%-1.6%
1 month (20 sessions)-14.7%-5%
3 months (63 sessions)-18.2%-14.3%
6 months (126 sessions)-6%-27.4%
Year to date9.2%-42.1%
1 year (252 sessions)5.8%-47%

Technicals

CHPY has the stronger structure
MetricCHPYTSLY
RSI (14)20.651.9
ADX (14)23.616.5
Price vs 50-day-9.3%0.9%
Price vs 200-day-10.2%-22.5%
Volatility (1M, annualized)27.8%30.1%

Risk

TSLY is the more resilient
MetricCHPYTSLY
Beta2.31.87
Sharpe ratio0.24-1.62
Sortino ratio0.34-2.17
Max drawdown-32.9%-52.7%
Current drawdown-32.1%-49.8%
Annualized volatility40.3%38.5%
Value at risk (95%)-4.3%-3.8%

Straight answers

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

What is the difference between CHPY and TSLY?

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

How much do CHPY and TSLY overlap?

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

Which ETF is more diversified, CHPY or TSLY?

CHPY holds more positions: 94 versus 15 for TSLY.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

CHPY has the lower expense ratio, 1.03% a year against 1.07% for TSLY.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

TSLY, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 81.23% 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 38.5% for TSLY.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

CHPY fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -32.9% against -52.7% for TSLY.

Compare CHPY and TSLY 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.