MSTY vs TSLY: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

MSTY and TSLY are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. MSTY is YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF, while TSLY is YieldMax TSLA Option Income Strategy ETF. MSTY is broader by holdings count, with 24 positions versus 15 for TSLY. MSTY has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has TSLY ahead on AIQ Score, 42 versus 33.

Market data as of Oct 24, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 24, 2026
MSTY
YieldMax
vs
TSLY
YieldMax
MSTY
YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF
Issuer
YieldMax
Inception
2024-02-21
TSLY
YieldMax TSLA Option Income Strategy ETF
Issuer
YieldMax
Inception
2022-11-22
Expense ratio
MSTY
1.03%
TSLY
1.07%
Lower annual fund costMSTY
Holdings
MSTY
24
TSLY
15
Broader reported basketMSTY
1Y return
MSTY
-76.5%
TSLY
-48.9%
Trailing performanceTSLY
Annualized volatility
MSTY
71.3%
TSLY
38.6%
Lower realized volatilityTSLY
MetricMSTYTSLY
Fund
Expense ratio1.03%1.07%
Holdings2415
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months134.06%78.89%
Average volume1,984,866477,327
Performance
1Y return-76.5%-48.9%
YTD return-51%-42.5%
Risk
Annualized volatility71.3%38.6%
Max drawdown (1Y)-80.3%-52.7%
Beta2.821.88
Sharpe ratio-1.65-1.63
Sortino ratio-2.91-2.20
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score33/10042/100
AIQ Edge Score1/102/10
Momentum28/10033/100
Risk Resilience0/10045/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF vs YieldMax TSLA Option Income Strategy ETF

Data as of Oct 24, 2026· market close· Coverage 62/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictStableAIQ Comparison Conviction 8/10

TSLY leads

TSLY leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 5 points over 30 sessions.

Stable: 3 of 3 evidence groups support TSLY, and its lead is widening.

Evidence agreement: 3 of 3Comparison trend: Strengthening
MSTY

YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF

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

YieldMax TSLA Option Income Strategy ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
42/100
AIQ Edge Score
2/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TSLY over MSTY, 42 versus 33 as of Oct 24, 2026. TSLY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while MSTY holds the stronger quality profile. TSLY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor TSLY today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. TSLY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 9 points over 30 sessions.

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

MSTY 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 wantMSTYTSLYFits
Lower costExpense ratio1.03%1.07%MSTY
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings2415MSTY
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield134.06%78.89%MSTY
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year-80.3%-52.7%TSLY
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year71.3%38.6%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.

MSTY
+70.5%
TSLY
+52.6%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

MSTY $17,046 · TSLY $15,258

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

Compare MSTY 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.

MSTY advantage
0
TSLY advantage
  • Risk Resilience0 vs 45
    TSLY +45
  • Quality54 vs 47
    MSTY +7
  • Momentum28 vs 33
    TSLY +5

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

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-23, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-22.

MSTY-1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -2

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.

TSLY-1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -4

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

TSLY's lead was unchanged in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MSTY 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 risk resilience and momentum.

MSTY (YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF): the counter-case, on quality — but at materially higher volatility, 58.8% against 33.1%.

Fund facts, side by side

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

MeasureMSTYTSLYWhy it matters
Expense ratio1.03%1.07%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings2415More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume1,984,866477,327Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility71.3%38.6%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-80.3%-52.7%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio-1.65-1.63Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta2.821.88Sensitivity 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 100.0%
MSTYTSLY

MSTY vs TSLY: five-year payout growth

MSTY began paying distributions in 2024, 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 metricMSTYTSLY
2025 annual payout$87.205$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

3 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 42
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsTSLYPrice vs 50-day -4.6% vs -2.5%; vs 200-day -26.3% vs -22.4%
Risk ResilienceTSLYRisk Resilience 0 vs 45
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MSTY and TSLY 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 moderate at 9 points.
  • 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)

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

100 daily snapshots · Jun 24 – Oct 23

TSLY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 9 points over 30 sessions.

Jun 24MSTY leads above the line · TSLY leads belowOct 23
Today
TSLY +9
33 vs 42
7 sessions ago
TSLY +4
38 vs 42
30 sessions ago
TSLY +5
45 vs 50
90 sessions ago
TSLY +13
33 vs 46

The lead changed hands 12 times in this window, most recently on Oct 2 when TSLY moved ahead of MSTY.

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.

MSTY

0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral

Only MSTY

  • ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.12%)
TSLY

0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral

No signal that the other name lacks.

Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.

Price vs model alignment

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

MSTYNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.07%, AIQ -1 points).

TSLYConfirmed weakness

Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.51%, 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.

  1. 1MSTY closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSLY's edge.
  2. 2MSTY'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

TSLY leads 4 of 6 windows
MetricMSTYTSLY
1 week (5 sessions)4.7%3.9%
1 month (20 sessions)-12.1%-3.8%
3 months (63 sessions)11.3%2.3%
6 months (126 sessions)-44.2%-25.9%
Year to date-51%-42.5%
1 year (252 sessions)-76.5%-48.9%

Technicals

TSLY has the stronger structure
MetricMSTYTSLY
RSI (14)33.839.1
ADX (14)17.316.7
Price vs 50-day-4.6%-2.5%
Price vs 200-day-26.3%-22.4%
Volatility (1M, annualized)58.8%33.1%

Risk

TSLY is the more resilient
MetricMSTYTSLY
Beta2.821.88
Sharpe ratio-1.65-1.63
Sortino ratio-2.91-2.2
Max drawdown-80.3%-52.7%
Current drawdown-75.3%-50.2%
Annualized volatility71.3%38.6%
Value at risk (95%)-6.6%-3.8%

Straight answers

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

Which ETF is more diversified, MSTY or TSLY?

MSTY holds more positions: 24 versus 15 for TSLY.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

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

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

MSTY, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 134.06% against 78.89% for TSLY.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

MSTY has been more volatile over the past year, at 71.3% annualized against 38.6% for TSLY.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

TSLY fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -52.7% against -80.3% for MSTY.

Compare MSTY 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.