What is a covered call ETF?

A covered call ETF, like the Derivative Income category these funds fall into, holds an underlying portfolio of stocks (in this case, Nasdaq-100 constituents) and simultaneously writes (sells) call options on those stocks. The premium received from selling these options is the primary source of the fund's high distributions. However, this strategy caps potential upside gains from the underlying stocks because if the stock price rises significantly above the strike price of the sold call, the fund may have to sell the shares at that capped price, missing further appreciation.

How do expense ratios affect returns?

The expense ratio is an annual fee charged by a fund to manage its assets, deducted directly from the fund's net asset value. For example, Fund A has an expense ratio of 0.29%, while Fund B's is 0.68%. This means Fund B charges 0.39 percentage points more annually. Over time, a higher expense ratio erodes net returns relative to lower-cost options, assuming the underlying performance is similar. It represents a guaranteed cost drag against the fund's gross investment returns.

What does 'track the Nasdaq-100' mean in this context?

Tracking the Nasdaq-100 index implies holding stocks selected from that index, representing large-cap non-financial companies listed on the Nasdaq Exchange. Fund A and Fund B are 'Derivative Income' funds, meaning they do not replicate the index performance perfectly. They hold a basket of Nasdaq-100 stocks but use an option writing overlay. The objective of tracking the index for these ETFs is primarily about maintaining the stock exposure that generates premiums for distributions, not mirroring the index's total return.

Which fund is cheaper to hold?

Fund A (GPIQ) is cheaper to hold due to its lower expense ratio of 0.29%. In comparison, Fund B (QQQI) has an expense ratio of 0.68%. The difference is 0.39 percentage points. If you invested £1,000, Fund A's annual cost would be £2.90, whereas Fund B's would be £6.80. This lower management fee for Fund A can potentially leave more capital invested, all else being equal.

How do the dividend yields compare?

Fund B (QQQI) offers a significantly higher headline dividend yield of 13.72% compared to Fund A's (GPIQ) 9.82%. This difference reflects the funds' specific option writing strategies and premium generation capabilities. Higher yields generally mean larger periodic distributions to shareholders but do not guarantee better total returns, as capital values can fluctuate. The distributions are paid out to investors, typically monthly for such income-oriented ETFs.

What kind of investor might prefer a shorter fund track record?

Neither fund has a long operational history; Fund A (GPIQ) launched on 24 October 2023, and Fund B (QQQI) launched on 30 January 2024. Both lack a full market cycle's worth of performance history. Generally, shorter track records may appeal less to conservative investors seeking proof of long-term consistency and stability during varying economic conditions. The limited history makes it harder to assess how the option strategies performed through significant market downturns or sustained bull rallies.

How do the funds compare on net assets?

Fund B (QQQI) is substantially larger in terms of net assets, managing £14.8 billion. In contrast, Fund A (GPIQ) manages £5.8 billion. Larger net assets can indicate higher demand and greater overall liquidity, which often leads to tighter bid-ask spreads on the exchange. Both amounts represent significant scale, sufficient to accommodate larger trades without substantial price impact, but Fund B is currently more than twice as large.

What are the common top holdings in both funds?

Both funds share a significant overlap in their top holdings, reflecting their focus on the Nasdaq-100 index. The common top holdings are NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, MU, AMZN, AMD, GOOGL, META, and TSLA. While the weightings vary slightly between the funds, these large-cap technology stocks dominate the portfolio composition for both. This similarity indicates that the income generation for both funds relies heavily on the price action of the same major tech leaders.

What concentration risks do these funds face?

Both funds face concentration risk because their holdings are heavily weighted towards the technology and communication services sectors, mirroring the Nasdaq-100 structure. Large-cap tech stocks like NVDA, AAPL, and MSFT make up significant portions of both portfolios. This exposure means the funds' performance and option premiums are strongly correlated with the sector. If the tech sector underperforms or experiences high volatility, both funds will likely feel a pronounced impact, regardless of their income distribution levels.

How does a strong market rally affect these funds?

In a strong bull market where the underlying stocks surge, the option-writing strategies used by these funds limit upside participation. Since the funds sell call options, they cap the potential gain from stock appreciation. When market prices exceed the option strike prices, the funds may have to sell shares at that price or let the option expire worthless, missing further capital appreciation. Consequently, these funds will generally underperform a direct index-tracking ETF during rapid, sustained growth phases.

Why is the difference between 9.82% and 13.72% yields important?

The yield represents the annualised income paid out relative to the share price. A yield of 13.72% for Fund B (QQQI) is nearly 4 percentage points higher than the 9.82% offered by Fund A (GPIQ). While this higher yield generates more current income, it often requires a more aggressive option strategy (e.g., writing at-the-money calls) which might further limit capital growth potential or increase volatility. The difference highlights a potential trade-off between income levels and total return mechanics.

What factors matter most when comparing these ETFs?

When comparing these Derivative Income ETFs, investors typically look at total return (combining share price movement and distributions), the expense ratio, and the consistency of distributions. The high yields are attractive, but the tax treatment and how the underlying stock portfolio performs are critical. The difference in fund size (net assets) also impacts liquidity. These factors help determine which fund aligns better with specific portfolio needs, rather than just choosing the headline dividend yield.

GPIQ vs QQQI

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

Compare Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) and NEOS NASDAQ 100 High Income ETF (QQQI) to review fees, holdings and dividends. Discover how each fund tracks its market to make informed choices based on the data provided. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

GPIQ

Metric

QQQI

0.29%

Expense Ratio

0.68%

9.82%

Dividend Yield

13.72%

$5.84B

Net Assets

$14.80B

107

Holdings

107

Oct 24, 2023

Inception Date

Jan 30, 2024

–

Index Tracked

–

Derivative Income

Fund Category

Derivative Income

GPIQ costs about $39.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	GPIQ	QQQI
NVDANVIDIA Corporation	8.52%	8.43%
AAPLApple Inc.	7.91%	7.77%
MSFTMicrosoft Corporation	5.80%	5.86%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.	4.84%	4.82%
AMZNAmazon.com, Inc.	4.35%	4.29%
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices, Inc.	4.01%	3.90%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc.	3.90%	3.21%
METAMeta Platforms, Inc.	3.28%	3.21%
TSLATesla, Inc.	2.66%	2.91%

Discover More Comparisons

GPIQ vs QYLD

Compare GPIQ and QYLD on fees, holdings, dividends and market tracking. Examine differences in expense ratios and yields between these Nasdaq 100 income ETFs.

GPIQ vs QDVO

Compare GPIQ and QDVO on fees, holdings, dividends and index tracking. View expense ratios, yields and key differences in these derivative income ETFs.

GPIQ vs GPIX

Compare Goldman Sachs GPIQ and GPIX income ETFs. Review 0.29% fees, 9.82% vs 8.07% yields, and top holdings. Assess tracking and performance neutrally.

Investment Analysis

GPIQ

Pros

GPIQ offers a relatively low expense ratio of 0.29% compared to many alternatives in the derivative income category.
With $5.8 billion in net assets, the fund provides substantial scale which can support better liquidity for larger trades.
The fund’s Nasdaq-100 focus targets growth-oriented technology and communication services firms, potentially offering capital appreciation alongside income.

Considerations

The high dividend yield of 9.82% is generated via options writing, which may limit upside participation during strong Nasdaq rallies.
Inception in October 2023 provides a short operational track record, making long-term performance consistency harder to assess.
Top holdings are heavily concentrated in large-cap technology stocks, with NVDA, AAPL, and MSFT alone exceeding 22% of the portfolio.

QQQI

Pros

QQQI delivers a very high dividend yield of 13.72%, appealing to investors seeking maximum current income from Nasdaq exposure.
Net assets of $14.8 billion ensure significant fund scale, contributing to tighter bid-ask spreads and high trading liquidity.
The fund includes a structured approach to option writing that has demonstrated robust distribution capabilities across recent periods.

Considerations

The expense ratio of 0.68% is notably higher than GPIQ’s, eroding net returns and making cost efficiency a concern.
A short inception date of January 2024 means the fund lacks a full market cycle’s worth of performance history.
Concentration risk remains high as major tech holdings like NVDA and AAPL dominate the portfolio, mirroring Nasdaq-100 weightings.

About GPIQ and QQQI

GPIQ (GPIQ)

The Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF is designed for investors interested in exposure to technology and growth sectors while seeking potential income. This fund tracks the Nasdaq-100, a broad index of non-financial companies listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market. The ETF primarily uses a covered call strategy, selling options on a basket of Nasdaq-100 stocks to generate income. While this approach can provide steady distributions, it may limit capital appreciation in periods of strong market growth. Investors should be aware that derivative strategies introduce unique risks, including option volatility. This fund is part of Goldman Sachs Asset Management's broader range of ETFs focused on income generation. It is suitable for those who understand option mechanics and are seeking yield alongside technology sector exposure.

QQQI (QQQI)

The NEOS NASDAQ 100 High Income ETF (QQQI) is a derivative income fund designed to offer investors exposure to the technology-heavy NASDAQ 100 index while generating substantial current income. Launched in January 2024, this ETF holds a diversified portfolio of 107 assets, primarily focusing on large-cap technology and growth companies. Its distinguishing feature is the systematic writing of covered call options on the underlying index, a strategy intended to harvest premium income that is distributed to shareholders. With a reported dividend yield of approximately 13.72%, it appeals to those seeking regular cash flow alongside potential capital appreciation. However, investors should note that the covered call strategy may limit upside potential during strong market rallies. The fund has an expense ratio of 0.68%, which is moderate for a derivative-based product. As with all investments, capital is at risk, and values can fluctuate due to market conditions.

Buy GPIQ or QQQI in Nemo

🆓

Zero Commission

Trade stocks, ETFs, and more with zero commission. Keep more of your returns.

🔒

Trusted & Regulated

Part of Exinity Group 2015, serving over a million customers globally.

💰

6% Interest on Cash

Earn 6% AER on uninvested cash with daily interest payments.

GPIQ vs QQQI

Fund Snapshot