NEO income ETFs can look very different depending on whether you only check the distribution rate or also check price trend, total return, payout support, and stability.
This May 2026 snapshot is not meant to rank the "best" NEO ETF. It is a structured comparison of the current income profile and recent fund behavior across the NEO ETF group tracked in Dividend Decoder.
| Fund Ticker | Dividend TTM | Price CAGR | Total Return CAGR | Payout Support Risk | Stability | Dividend TTM (MoM) | Price Growth (MoM) | Total Return CAGR (MoM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BTCI | 38.77% | -20.94% | 4.85% | Elevated | LOW | 0.02pp | -1.84pp | -2.50pp |
| CSHI | 4.91% | -0.17% | 5.44% | Low | HIGH | -0.03pp | 0.00pp | -0.05pp |
| IAUI | 12.43% | 10.40% | 25.18% | Low | LOW | 1.24pp | -3.47pp | -3.91pp |
| IWMI | 13.43% | 2.41% | 18.85% | Low | LOW | -0.24pp | 1.29pp | 1.51pp |
| IYRI | 11.16% | -2.32% | 9.54% | Low | MID | 0.10pp | -1.15pp | -1.30pp |
| MLPI | 7.34% | 22.48% | 44.54% | Low | MID | 1.62pp | -26.96pp | -32.36pp |
| NIHI | 7.79% | 5.11% | 17.70% | Low | MID | 0.71pp | 2.00pp | 2.11pp |
| QQQH | 8.80% | 11.03% | 20.78% | Low | LOW | -0.31pp | -0.11pp | -0.07pp |
| QQQI | 13.28% | 6.12% | 22.24% | Low | LOW | -0.71pp | 2.36pp | 2.73pp |
| SPYH | 7.53% | 14.78% | 24.04% | Low | MID | -0.15pp | 1.63pp | 1.79pp |
| SPYI | 11.63% | 3.70% | 16.90% | Low | MID | -0.27pp | 0.86pp | 0.97pp |
| XBCI | 13.70% | -36.46% | -5.08% | Elevated | LOW | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| XQQI | 6.08% | 34.43% | 66.60% | Low | LOW | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| XSPI | 5.31% | 8.64% | 29.66% | Low | LOW | N/A | N/A | N/A |
How to read the columns
Dividend TTM shows the trailing 12-month cash distribution rate. It is useful for checking the current income profile, but it should not be treated as the full story.
Price CAGR shows whether the fund's price base has been growing or declining over the evaluation window. This matters for income funds because a high distribution can be less attractive if the capital base is consistently eroding.
Total Return CAGR includes both price movement and distributions. This is the cleaner way to check whether the income stream and price behavior worked together over time.
Payout Support Risk is a simple label for whether the payout appears supported by recent price and total-return behavior. Elevated does not mean a fund is automatically bad, but it means the distribution should be reviewed more carefully.
Stability reflects recent price-behavior stability based on beta, volatility, and drawdown. It does not mean a fund is safe; it only describes the stability profile in this framework.
MoM columns compare this snapshot with the prior monthly snapshot. They are not one-month return signals. They are included to show what changed since the last update.
What stood out this month
BTCI still has the highest income number, but the support picture is not clean
BTCI has the highest Dividend TTM in this group at 38.77%. However, it also shows -20.94% Price CAGR and Elevated payout support risk.
That combination is why headline yield alone can be misleading. The fund may still be useful for some income-focused investors, but the income number should be read together with the price trend and total-return behavior.
IAUI has a more balanced return profile
IAUI shows 12.43% Dividend TTM, 10.40% Price CAGR, and 25.18% Total Return CAGR.
Compared with the highest-yield names, IAUI looks less extreme. The income rate is still meaningful, while the price and total-return metrics are both positive in this snapshot. Stability is still marked LOW, so it should not be read as a low-risk fund.
MLPI shows strong total-return behavior, but the monthly shift is worth noticing
MLPI shows 7.34% Dividend TTM, 22.48% Price CAGR, and 44.54% Total Return CAGR. That is one of the stronger total-return profiles in the group.
However, the MoM columns show a large negative shift in price growth and total-return CAGR versus the prior snapshot. That does not invalidate the longer-window profile, but it is worth monitoring in future updates.
SPYH, SPYI, and QQQI look more balanced than the highest-yield names
SPYH, SPYI, and QQQI do not have the highest Dividend TTM numbers in the group, but all three have Low payout support risk and positive Total Return CAGR.
For investors comparing NEO funds, this may be the more useful part of the table: not which fund has the biggest distribution, but which funds show a more balanced mix of income, price trend, and total return.
XBCI is the weakest profile in this snapshot
XBCI shows 13.70% Dividend TTM, but also -36.46% Price CAGR, -5.08% Total Return CAGR, and Elevated payout support risk.
That is the type of setup where the distribution rate needs extra caution. The yield may look attractive, but the price and total-return behavior do not support a clean income story in this snapshot.
XQQI has the strongest total-return profile among the newer/incomplete names
XQQI shows 6.08% Dividend TTM, 34.43% Price CAGR, and 66.60% Total Return CAGR.
Because the MoM fields are unavailable, it should be treated as an incomplete monthly-comparison record. Still, based on the available metrics, it stands out more for total return than for headline yield.
Main takeaway
The May 2026 NEO ETF snapshot shows why income-fund evaluation should not stop at distribution rate.
A high Dividend TTM can be useful, but it needs context from price trend, total return, payout support, and stability. In this group, some funds show high income with weaker price behavior, while others show lower income but cleaner return support.
For income investors, the more practical question is not only:
Which fund pays the most?
It is also:
Is the payout supported by price behavior and total return over time?
That is the main reason this snapshot compares yield, price CAGR, total return CAGR, payout support risk, and stability side by side.
Note: Metrics are exported from Dividend Decoder as a partial snapshot; not investment advice.