GPIX vs QQQI: ETF Comparison
Compare GPIX (Goldman Sachs S&P 500 Premium Income ETF) and QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF) side by side by average annual total return since inception — one fair number covering price and dividends.
Updated Aug 4, 2026
*For entertainment purposes ONLY! NOT financial advice! Data may be inaccurate.*
Sponsored by VegaShares
GPIX vs QQQI: The Verdict
On average annual total return since inception, GPIX holds a clear edge over QQQI: +23.0% per year vs +17.6% per year — a gap of 5.4 percentage points annually. Total return counts both price movement and dividends, so this is the whole picture of each fund's performance, not just yield.
Income investors will notice the yield gap: QQQI currently yields 14.0% vs GPIX's 7.9%. Higher yield often comes with trade-offs in price appreciation, which is exactly why total return is the fairer scoreboard.
Sponsored by VegaShares
GPIX vs QQQI Side-by-Side Data
| Symbol | Name | Provider | Inception | Age | Total Return | Avg. Annual Return | Yield | Expense Ratio | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPIX | Goldman Sachs S&P 500 Premium Income ETF | Goldman Sachs | 10/24/23 | 2.8y | +78.0% | +23.0% | 7.9% | 0.29% | B |
| QQQI | NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF | NEOS | 1/20/2024 | 2.5y | +51.0% | +17.6% | 14.0% | 0.68% | B |
GPIX vs QQQI — Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better, GPIX or QQQI?
By average annual total return since inception, GPIX holds a clear edge over QQQI (+23.0% vs +17.6% per year). "Better" depends on your goals — yield, payout frequency, and strategy differ between the two funds.
What is the difference between GPIX and QQQI?
GPIX (Goldman Sachs S&P 500 Premium Income ETF) is offered by Goldman Sachs and currently yields 7.9%. QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF) is offered by NEOS and yields 14.0%. Their average annual total returns since inception are +23.0% and +17.6% respectively.
Does GPIX pay a higher dividend than QQQI?
GPIX currently yields 7.9% and QQQI yields 14.0%. Remember that yield alone doesn't capture performance — total return (price + dividends) is the fairer comparison.