SPYI vs TDIV: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
SPYI and TDIV are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SPYI is Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF, while TDIV is First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund. SPYI is broader by holdings count, with 508 positions versus 95 for TDIV. TDIV is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has TDIV ahead on AIQ Score, 50 versus 49.
What is the main difference between SPYI and TDIV?
TDIV puts 84% of its assets in Technology, while SPYI spreads across 11 sectors with none above 39%.
| Metric | SPYI | TDIV |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.68% | 0.5% |
| Holdings | 508 | 95 |
| Top-10 concentration | 38% | 50.6% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 12.01% | 1.4% |
| Average volume | 2,696,728 | 162,987 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +0.2% | +13.5% |
| YTD return | +0.2% | +16.9% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 11.1% | 20.7% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -10.1% | -16.6% |
| Beta | 0.81 | 1.35 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.19 | 0.57 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.26 | 0.87 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 49/100 | 50/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 4/10 | 4/10 |
| Momentum | 25/100 | 42/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 80/100 | 67/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF vs First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund
TDIV leads
TDIV leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from SPYI.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support TDIV, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TDIV over SPYI, 50 versus 49 as of Oct 24, 2026. TDIV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while SPYI holds the stronger quality profile. TDIV also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TDIV today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. TDIV lead: Reversed — SPYI led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TDIV now leads by 1.
Compare Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF and First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
SPYI vs TDIV: 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 | SPYI | TDIV | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.68% | 0.5% | TDIV |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 508 | 95 | SPYI |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 38% | 50.6% | SPYI |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 12.01% | 1.4% | SPYI |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -10.1% | -16.6% | SPYI |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 11.1% | 20.7% | SPYI |
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 SPYI and TDIV 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.
- Momentum25 vs 42TDIV +17
- Quality62 vs 49SPYI +13
- Risk Resilience80 vs 67SPYI +13
- Value41 vs 48TDIV +7
2 of 4 evidence groups favor TDIV. TDIV’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; SPYI 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.
Largest factor move: Momentum -14
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Value +1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
The lead changed hands: TDIV moved ahead of SPYI in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SPYI and TDIV both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TDIV (First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
SPYI (Neos S&P 500(R) High Income ETF): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience.
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 | SPYI | TDIV | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.68% | 0.5% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 508 | 95 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 2,696,728 | 162,987 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 11.1% | 20.7% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -10.1% | -16.6% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.19 | 0.57 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.81 | 1.35 | 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
SPYI and TDIV share 14.64% of their weighted exposure across 34 common holdings.
473 holdings are unique to SPYI, and 59 holdings are unique to TDIV. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
TDIV is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 50.56% of the fund, against 37.98% for SPYI (95 holdings vs 508). 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 | SPYI | TDIV | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corporation | 5.57% | 9.6% | 5.57% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc. | 2.6% | 6.75% | 2.6% |
| CSCOCisco Systems, Inc. | 0.68% | 1.99% | 0.68% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 0.55% | 2.07% | 0.55% |
| ORCLOracle Corporation | 0.38% | 5.56% | 0.38% |
| TXNTexas Instruments Incorporated | 0.37% | 6.19% | 0.37% |
| KLACKLA Corporation | 0.36% | 1.33% | 0.36% |
| CRMSalesforce, Inc. | 0.34% | 2.69% | 0.34% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What SPYI adds that TDIV doesn’t
| Holding | SPYI | TDIV |
|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 8.02% | Not held |
| AAPLApple Inc | 7.27% | Not held |
| AMZNAmazon.com Inc | 3.81% | Not held |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 2.96% | Not held |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.41% | Not held |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.14% | Not held |
What TDIV adds that SPYI doesn’t
| Holding | TDIV | SPYI |
|---|---|---|
| IBMInternational Business Machines Corporation | 6.93% | 0.34% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc. | 6.75% | 2.6% |
| TXNTexas Instruments Incorporated | 6.19% | 0.37% |
| ORCLOracle Corporation | 5.56% | 0.38% |
| TSMTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (ADR) | 4.46% | Not held |
| QCOMQUALCOMM Incorporated | 3.26% | 0.29% |
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.
SPYI vs TDIV: five-year payout growth
TDIV grew its split-adjusted payout at 5.79% a year over 2020-2025. SPYI began paying distributions in 2022, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.
| Dividend metric | SPYI | TDIV |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $6.146 | $1.361 |
| Peer rank | not ranked | #14 of 33 |
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 4 covered evidence groups favor TDIV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 49 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | TDIV | Value 41 vs 48 |
| Technicals | TDIV | Price vs 50-day -1.7% vs -1.1%; vs 200-day -0.1% vs 4.7% |
| Risk Resilience | SPYI | Risk Resilience 80 vs 67 |
| 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 SPYI and TDIV and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 TDIV.
How the comparison changed
44 daily snapshots · Sep 8 – Oct 23TDIV lead: Reversed — SPYI led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TDIV now leads by 1.
- Today
- TDIV +1
- 49 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- SPYI +8
- 59 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- SPYI +3
- 58 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Oct 23 when TDIV moved ahead of SPYI.
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.
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SPYI
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.78%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.9%)
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
TDIV 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.44%, AIQ -3 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.11%, 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.
- 1SPYI closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to TDIV's edge.
- 2SPYI's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3TDIV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 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
TDIV leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | SPYI | TDIV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.3% | 1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.9% | -0.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.6% | 4.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 0.8% | 5.5% |
| Year to date | 0.2% | 16.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 0.2% | 13.5% |
Technicals
TDIV has the stronger structure| Metric | SPYI | TDIV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 30.5 | 42.4 |
| ADX (14) | 19.8 | 9.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.7% | -1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.1% | 4.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 7.7% | 17.7% |
Risk
SPYI is the more resilient| Metric | SPYI | TDIV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.81 | 1.35 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.19 | 0.57 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.26 | 0.87 |
| Max drawdown | -10.1% | -16.6% |
| Current drawdown | -3.3% | -11.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 11.1% | 20.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.3% | -2% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between SPYI and TDIV?
TDIV puts 84% of its assets in Technology, while SPYI spreads across 11 sectors with none above 39%.
How much do SPYI and TDIV overlap?
SPYI and TDIV share 14.64% of their weighted exposure across 34 common holdings. 473 holdings are unique to SPYI, and 59 holdings are unique to TDIV. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, SPYI or TDIV?
SPYI holds more positions: 508 versus 95 for TDIV.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
TDIV has the lower expense ratio, 0.5% a year against 0.68% for SPYI.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
SPYI, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 12.01% against 1.4% for TDIV.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
TDIV has been more volatile over the past year, at 20.7% annualized against 11.1% for SPYI.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
SPYI fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -10.1% against -16.6% for TDIV.
Compare SPYI and TDIV 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.