I use this NEO screen as a monthly issuer check, but I still do not want to read it as a ranking. The useful question is not which ticker has the highest Dividend TTM. It is which payout looks more supported by price behavior, total return, and stability.
The current list includes BTCI, CSHI, IAUI, IWMI, IYRI, MLPI, NIHI, QQQH, QQQI, SPYH, SPYI, XBCI, XQQI, and XSPI.
Some newer rows are incomplete where the visible snapshot did not include enough data. Those values are shown as N/A.
| Fund Ticker | Dividend TTM | Price CAGR | Total Return CAGR | Payout Support Risk | Stability | Dividend TTM (MoM) | Price Growth (MoM) | Total Return CAGR (MoM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BTCI | 38.75% | -19.10% | 11.26% | Elevated | LOW | 43.62% (-4.87pp) | -24.64% (+5.54pp) | N/A |
| CSHI | 4.94% | -0.17% | 0.53% | Low | HIGH | 4.98% (-0.04pp) | -0.24% (+0.07pp) | N/A |
| IAUI | 11.19% | 13.87% | -2.10% | Low | LOW | 10.00% (+1.19pp) | 17.37% (-3.50pp) | N/A |
| IWMI | 13.67% | 1.12% | 8.47% | Low | LOW | 14.48% (-0.81pp) | -2.97% (+4.09pp) | N/A |
| IYRI | 11.06% | -1.17% | 5.30% | Low | MID | 11.67% (-0.61pp) | -5.15% (+3.98pp) | N/A |
| MLPI | 5.72% | 49.44% | 4.84% | Low | HIGH | 4.65% (+1.07pp) | 57.40% (-7.96pp) | N/A |
| NIHI | 7.08% | 3.11% | 3.51% | Low | LOW | 6.51% (+0.57pp) | -4.20% (+7.31pp) | N/A |
| QQQH | 9.11% | 11.14% | 5.68% | Low | LOW | 9.48% (-0.37pp) | 9.25% (+1.89pp) | N/A |
| QQQI | 13.99% | 3.76% | 9.16% | Low | LOW | 15.05% (-1.06pp) | -0.14% (+3.90pp) | N/A |
| SPYH | 7.68% | 13.15% | 4.70% | Low | MID | 7.83% (-0.15pp) | 9.24% (+3.91pp) | N/A |
| SPYI | 11.90% | 2.84% | 6.61% | Low | MID | 12.50% (-0.60pp) | 1.23% (+1.61pp) | N/A |
| XBCI | N/A | N/A | 16.95% | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| XQQI | N/A | N/A | 13.47% | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| XSPI | N/A | N/A | 9.64% | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
What I noticed
BTCI is still the most aggressive income row in this table. It has 38.75% Dividend TTM, but Price CAGR is -19.10%, Total Return CAGR is 11.26%, and payout support risk is marked Elevated. That is exactly the type of row where the payout number needs context.
MLPI has the strongest Price CAGR at 49.44%, with 5.72% Dividend TTM, 4.84% Total Return CAGR, Low payout support risk, and HIGH stability. That makes it very different from BTCI even though both sit in the same issuer screen.
SPYI and QQQI are useful to compare because both are income-oriented equity index names. SPYI shows 11.90% Dividend TTM, 2.84% Price CAGR, and 6.61% Total Return CAGR. QQQI shows 13.99% Dividend TTM, 3.76% Price CAGR, and 9.16% Total Return CAGR. In this snapshot, QQQI has the higher payout and higher total return figure, but both remain much more income-oriented than plain growth exposure.
CSHI is a different kind of row. It has 4.94% Dividend TTM, -0.17% Price CAGR, 0.53% Total Return CAGR, Low payout support risk, and HIGH stability. I would not compare it directly against BTCI or QQQI as if the role were the same.
XBCI, XQQI, and XSPI are incomplete in this snapshot. They show Total Return CAGR values, but the other fields are N/A, so I would wait for fuller history before making direct comparisons.
My takeaway is that the NEO list is useful only after separating roles: high-income option strategy, cash-like income, index-linked income, commodity-linked exposure, and incomplete newer rows. The table helps, but the first step is still knowing what job each fund is supposed to do.
Note: Metrics are exported from Dividend Decoder as a partial snapshot; not investment advice.