XPAY vs YMAX: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
XPAY and YMAX are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. XPAY is Roundhill Investments - S&P 500 Target 20 Managed Distribution ETF, while YMAX is YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs. YMAX is broader by holdings count, with 30 positions versus 15 for XPAY. XPAY is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has XPAY ahead on AIQ Score, 44 versus 42.
What is the main difference between XPAY and YMAX?
YMAX puts 61% of its assets in Technology, while XPAY spreads across 11 sectors with none above 39%.
| Metric | XPAY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.49% | 1.33% |
| Holdings | 15 | 30 |
| Top-10 concentration | 90.1% | 48.3% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 21.22% | 61.45% |
| Average volume | 52,025 | 1,280,024 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | -4.9% | -40.8% |
| YTD return | -4.7% | -26.5% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 14.2% | 25.9% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -15.5% | -42.7% |
| Beta | 0.99 | 1.62 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.60 | -2.03 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.77 | -3.01 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 44/100 | 42/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 3/10 | 2/10 |
| Momentum | 37/100 | 35/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 83/100 | 60/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Roundhill Investments - S&P 500 Target 20 Managed Distribution ETF vs YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs
XPAY leads
XPAY leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from YMAX.
Fragile: 3 of 4 evidence groups support XPAY, and the lead recently changed hands.
Roundhill Investments - S&P 500 Target 20 Managed Distribution ETF
YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors XPAY over YMAX, 44 versus 42 as of Oct 21, 2026. XPAY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while YMAX holds the stronger quality profile. XPAY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor XPAY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. XPAY lead: Reversed — YMAX led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; XPAY now leads by 2.
Compare Roundhill Investments - S&P 500 Target 20 Managed Distribution ETF and YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
XPAY vs YMAX: 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 | XPAY | YMAX | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.49% | 1.33% | XPAY |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 15 | 30 | YMAX |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 90.1% | 48.3% | YMAX |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 21.22% | 61.45% | YMAX |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -15.5% | -42.7% | XPAY |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 14.2% | 25.9% | XPAY |
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 XPAY and YMAX 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 Resilience83 vs 60XPAY +23
- Quality35 vs 49YMAX +14
- Value40 vs 33XPAY +7
- Momentum37 vs 35Even
3 of 4 evidence groups favor XPAY. XPAY’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; YMAX 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: Momentum +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
XPAY's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — XPAY and YMAX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
XPAY (Roundhill Investments - S&P 500 Target 20 Managed Distribution ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
YMAX (YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs): the counter-case, on quality — but at materially higher volatility, 23.7% against 14.3%.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | XPAY | YMAX | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.49% | 1.33% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 15 | 30 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 52,025 | 1,280,024 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 14.2% | 25.9% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -15.5% | -42.7% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.60 | -2.03 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.99 | 1.62 | 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
XPAY and YMAX share 0.89% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings.
13 holdings are unique to XPAY, and 28 holdings are unique to YMAX. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
XPAY is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 90.14% of the fund, against 48.33% for YMAX (15 holdings vs 30). 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 | XPAY | YMAX | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| FGXXXFirst American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/2031 | 4.92% | 0.89% | 0.89% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What XPAY adds that YMAX doesn’t
| Holding | XPAY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| 4SPY 270212C00033470SPY 02/12/2027 33.47 C | 14.11% | Not held |
| 4SPY 270716C00036700SPY 07/16/2027 36.7 C | 12.1% | Not held |
| 4SPY 270312C00033670SPY 03/12/2027 33.67 C | 11.82% | Not held |
| 4SPY 270416C00033870SPY 04/16/2027 33.87 C | 11.79% | Not held |
| 4SPY 270611C00037110SPY 06/11/2027 37.11 C | 10.34% | Not held |
| 4SPY 270115C00033210SPY 01/15/2027 33.21 C | 7.14% | Not held |
What YMAX adds that XPAY doesn’t
| Holding | YMAX | XPAY |
|---|---|---|
| SMCYYieldMax Smci Option Income Strategy ETF | 5.56% | Not held |
| GDXYYieldMax Gold Miners Option Income Strategy ETF | 5.52% | Not held |
| MSFOYieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF | 5.09% | Not held |
| GPTYYieldMax AI & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF | 5.07% | Not held |
| XOMOYieldMax Xom Option Income Strategy ETF | 4.74% | Not held |
| SNOYYieldMax SNOW Option Income Strategy ETF | 4.73% | 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.
XPAY vs YMAX: five-year payout growth
XPAY began paying distributions in 2024, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare. YMAX began paying distributions in 2024, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.
| Dividend metric | XPAY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $11.434 | $7.674 |
| 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
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor XPAY. 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 | 44 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | XPAY | Value 40 vs 33 |
| Technicals | XPAY | Price vs 50-day -1.6% vs -2.1%; vs 200-day -2.4% vs -10.6% |
| Risk Resilience | XPAY | Risk Resilience 83 vs 60 |
| 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 XPAY and YMAX 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 XPAY.
How the comparison changed
45 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 20XPAY lead: Reversed — YMAX led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; XPAY now leads by 2.
- Today
- XPAY +2
- 44 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- XPAY +2
- 43 vs 41
- 30 sessions ago
- YMAX +2
- 46 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 6 when XPAY moved ahead of YMAX.
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.
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
Only XPAY
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.03%)
0 bullish / 4 bearish
Only YMAX
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.4%)
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.53%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.23%, 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.
- 1YMAX closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to XPAY's edge.
- 2YMAX's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3XPAY 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
XPAY leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | XPAY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.9% | -3.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.4% | -7.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2.3% | -2.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -1.2% | -13.4% |
| Year to date | -4.7% | -26.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -4.9% | -40.8% |
Technicals
XPAY has the stronger structure| Metric | XPAY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44.6 | 41.7 |
| ADX (14) | 18.4 | 15.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.6% | -2.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.4% | -10.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 14.3% | 23.7% |
Risk
XPAY is the more resilient| Metric | XPAY | YMAX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.99 | 1.62 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.6 | -2.03 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.77 | -3.01 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -42.7% |
| Current drawdown | -8.5% | -41.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 14.2% | 25.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.6% | -3% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between XPAY and YMAX?
YMAX puts 61% of its assets in Technology, while XPAY spreads across 11 sectors with none above 39%.
How much do XPAY and YMAX overlap?
XPAY and YMAX share 0.89% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings. 13 holdings are unique to XPAY, and 28 holdings are unique to YMAX. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, XPAY or YMAX?
YMAX holds more positions: 30 versus 15 for XPAY.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
XPAY has the lower expense ratio, 0.49% a year against 1.33% for YMAX.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
YMAX, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 61.45% against 21.22% for XPAY.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
YMAX has been more volatile over the past year, at 25.9% annualized against 14.2% for XPAY.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
XPAY fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -15.5% against -42.7% for YMAX.
Compare XPAY and YMAX 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.