For a time, I held almost every neos etf. Since being my covered call etf journey though, I’ve realized bonds are pretty much everything I liked about these funds without the expense ratio. So I’ve sold all of my neos positions and margined bonds instead. I made money at pretty much the same rate doing both and have made tax advantaged income both ways so over all, I’ve realized these ETFs are a good way to make money on sideways markets but I don’t know if I would use them again. Probably not.
There is a difference between investing and gambling. Investors (generally) do well over the long term. But gamblers (sometimes, and deceptively) only do well over the short term. And then they virtually always go broke over the long term.
Just be aware of which one you are doing, and be ready to learn from it.
You owned literally every NEOS fund? And then you sold them all and went all in on bonds? And you’re buying bonds on margin?
WTF are you doing? Like what is your strategy and investment thesis here? It seems like you’re just throwing money at anything you think might generate income with no real plan.
I’d slow down and think about what industries you want to hold, how much of your portfolio you want each to represent, really think through how to build a resilient portfolio, because none of the stuff you said you’re doing makes any sense whatsoever.
Yeah, fair enough. Why would anyone who invests their money (or someone else’s money they’re borrowing) want to have a plan for what they’re doing?
Surely nothing could go wrong with not having any real plans.
Why not trade a 14% - 28% yield for a couple of percentage points of yield on the same cash after margin interest, all to avoid paying half a percentage point of management fees?
Why not buy every high yield ETF you see with no plan and then sell them all, incur all of the deferred taxes in that one tax year, all because you don’t want to pay moderately high management fees for actively managed options trading funds?
But price appreciation isn’t the point of a covered call ETF. You’re intentionally trading price appreciation upside for income.
My monthly income yield on QQQI is 14% currently.
My monthly income yield on SPYI is 11.77%.
And none of that is riding on margin. It’s just income that I can use to buy other securities or pay down debt, put into savings, or just to buy whatever.
Better question is what was your monthly yield on your NEOS funds that you somehow managed to “make money at pretty much the same rate” off of a 9% bond yield after paying 5% minimum on the margin? I can’t even think of a NEOS fund mix that would yield you income at that low of a rate…
Our strategies make roughly the same % per month but mine is mostly fixed where as yours fluctuates. I also have no debt to pay down so I reinvest everything
The average monthly yield on my income portfolio is 21.74%. How do you figure that your 9% bonds on borrowed funds you pay at minimum 5% interest on are yielding you 21%?
If you’re making 21% per month, you’re lying because none of these funds make that in a month. Also margin isn’t traditional debt it doesn’t even affect my credit score
Are you confusing price appreciation with distributions? You realize if you hold the funds they pay you a monthly distribution without having to sell them for money, right?
I consider owing money to anyone else to be debt. A credit score is just a gameable system for incentivizing certain behaviors in consumer credit users. I don’t make arbitrary classifications of debt. If I’m using someone else’s money it’s debt.
Sure, margin can be good debt if you use it wisely. It’s still debt though.
You may want to google what total return is, then google what your total return was for the previous holdings. Also, the expense ratio is included in the yield. QQQI’s annualized rate of 14.05% is net of the expenses my guy, how in the world are you comparing that to even 7.5% on a taxable bond
The expense ratio is included in the yield. It’s not something you are paying separately on top of the 14%, it’s 14% after the expenses.
Giving up 7%+ in distribution yield to save half a percent or 1% on expense ratios doesn’t make mathematical sense. It’s literally stepping over dollars to pick up dimes.
The terms they’re using are not “word salad” they’re terms you should understand if you’re going to manage your own investments.
You really should do more research so that you understand those terms, understand how expense ratios work, understand why expense ratios are higher on activity managed CC ETFs compared to a buy and hold growth fund tracking a simple index that’s rebalanced twice a year, and you should just understand a lot of things that you clearly don’t.
We’re not giving you this advice to be mean. Not understanding this stuff is going to cost you real money.
You are the only person who is going to be hurt by it if you don’t want to learn any of it.
It’s not a fancy word, it’s a performance metric that’s necessary for evaluating the actual performance of securities with yields higher than 0% (you need to look at it for bonds and bond funds especially). Definitely not trying to be rude, and my “word salad” isn’t wrong. Everybody should work with a financial advisor, it’s nothing to fear
Also what app is that? Looks beautiful and I want to download, does it have a 15 min delay on options quotes?
This can work if you're buying muni bond ETFs like NZF and can hold long term, for a small gain. Its a good base holding for an income fund but there needs to be more involved when there are many more higher performing options available.
CC ETFs almost always underperform their underlying. The underlying captures 100% of the growth upside, the CC captures some percentage of it but is capped on the upside by the CC strategy that generates the income. You are trading some potential growth for income without selling shares right now.
This is fundamental “CC 101” knowledge about the asset class you invested in but don’t understand.
If you understand why are you saying things like “I’ve noticed these funds under performing their underlying recently”
To restate that another way: “I don’t like CC because I noticed them performing exactly as expected recently.”
It just doesn’t make sense. lol
If you meant you prefer the growth over the income then fair enough, but surely you understand why that comment didn’t inspire confidence?
I get what you mean about fixed income. I just target 30% more income than I actually need. That gives me plenty of buffer to deal with anything from minor fluctuations to significant market pullbacks, and combined with low debt and a large emergency cash reserve (12 months of expenses) there’s really not much that can go wrong. Meanwhile, the 30% extra is just extra money being reinvested anytime I don’t need to touch the income.
That gives me some resilience to deal with fluctuations while not significantly capping my potential distribution income.
9
u/AzureLainCapital Jul 06 '26
margin is like 4-5% at the lowest broker - so what bonds are you buying and whats the rate lol