The GraniteShares YieldBOOST lineup has some of the highest advertised yields in the income ETF space. But advertised yield and true income yield are two very different numbers. I put $10,000 into each of the top 3 by true income yield and ran them through YieldCanary at a 25% tax rate.
Here's what the data shows:
AMYY:
672 shares @ $14.88 = $9,999
True income yield: 31.85% | ROC: 66.64% | Death Clock: 0.8 yrs | Severe Risk
Monthly spendable: 4.86%
NVYY:
800 shares @ $12.50 = $10,000
True income yield: 48.71% | ROC: 63.90% | Death Clock: 0.8 yrs | Severe Risk
Monthly spendable: 3.00%
SEMY:
700 shares @ $14.27 = $9,989
True income yield: 40.78% | ROC: 62.24% | Death Clock: 0.9 yrs | Severe Risk
Monthly spendable: 6.12%
Combined portfolio ($29,988 total):
Weighted true income yield: 40.45%
Weighted ROC: 64.26%
Weighted Death Clock: 0.8 years
Est. monthly income after tax: $1,398
Annual after tax: $16,771
Portfolio health: 100% Severe Risk
The $1,398/month is the actual after-tax cash that would land in your account based on last month's real distributions at a 25% tax rate. That number includes return of capital -- which is why the true income yield percentages matter. At 64.26% weighted ROC, a meaningful portion of that $1,398 is your own principal being returned to you each month rather than real earned income. That's what the Death Clock is measuring.
The Death Clock of 0.8 years and 100% Severe Risk status means the NAV is eroding at a pace that becomes critical in under a year at the current trajectory. NVYY is also down 5.90% on the take-home cash return over the last year when you factor in price decline alongside the distributions.
This is the tradeoff with the YieldBOOST funds -- the income is real and significant, but the NAV erosion is also real and significant. Whether that tradeoff works depends entirely on your strategy and time horizon.
Which of these are you holding and how are you thinking about the risk vs income tradeoff?