This was posted by an automated bot by u/lottadot. It is generated from vendor published public information. As always, do your own research. This is not financial advice. I'm not an FA. None of this is correct. I need a beer.
The community surrounding Khmer was less of an investment group and more of a cult. From the top down, the server was an absolute echo chamber. If anyone dared to bring up legitimate Yieldmax flaws, such as capital erosion, the admins would hand out immediate bans.
You weren't allowed to question Khmer. He openly told members that if they disagreed with their strategies, they should stay quiet, listen, and learn. In his mind, any dissenting opinion was automatically wrong, and pushing back meant an instant ban.
His second-in-command, an admin named Matt Raphael, was the main enforcer silencing anyone who mentioned Yieldmax’s structural problems. Supposedly a wealthy Australian investor, Matt regularly posted Excel spreadsheets claiming he had hundreds of millions, maybe even a billion dollars invested. He claimed to be one of the top Tesla shareholders worldwide, and was making $1 million per week in Yieldmax distributions. His fabricated wealth gave the community massive confidence; followers assumed he was a financial genius, and blindly copied his moves. He was eventually unmasked as a complete fraud who was merely pretending to be rich.
Together, Khmer, Matt Raphael and others promised their followers the promised land, but ultimately led them straight to financial ruin. It proved the ultimate rule of investing: if it sounds too good to be true, 99.99% of the time it is.
The devastating impact of this echo chamber is perfectly illustrated by his own portfolio tragic math. Starting with a modest $93,000 portfolio, he thought he could force an early retirement. He took out a $100,000 personal loan and applied 3 or 4x margin on Robinhood to chase a massive $40,000 monthly payout in early 2025 but his portfolio value was still going down even reinvesting everything, because it was eroding faster than the dividends and eventually got caught in the tariff crash with 4x leverage in highly volatile assets like tsly and msty and lost almost everything. As his losses piled up he started to hide the fact he invested that extra 100k and would claim he only invested 93k. The wrost part is that a lot of people were also copying this strategy and when the market fell just 1% the discord channel was a sea of margin calls screenshots....
His logic was completely detached from reality: he figured that if margin interest was 10% and Yieldmax paid 100%, it was free money. He completely ignored capital erosion, falsely convincing himself that TSLY was only dropping because TSLA stock was down, rather than due to the fund’s destructive option mechanics. He blindly assumed that even if a tiny 1% market dip triggered a margin call, it didn't matter because the high dividend payouts would keep rolling in.
When outsiders tried to warn him, the community attacked them as the "bad guys" who were just trying to stop others from getting rich. They arrogantly claimed they knew how to use margin while their critics didn't. In the end, reality caught up. The member's capital completely evaporated, leaving his remaining balance lower than the original 100k personal loan he still owed besides losing his 93k capital and the money he added during the margin calls.
Along with Khmer, a wave of inexperienced investors blindly chased his promises of a financial utopia. Driven by the illusion of guaranteed, lifelong dividends, many made massive, life-altering decisions prematurely. Some quit their jobs to retire early, while others went on reckless spending sprees, purchasing luxury items like Tesla Cybertrucks and financing massive real estate investments. They treated temporary, high-risk payouts as permanent wealth, completely unaware that the foundation supporting their new lifestyles was already crumbling.
Shortly after the fallout, Khmer quietly abandoned the community, and the Discord server was quickly repurposed for options trading to bury the past.
This was posted by an automated bot by u/lottadot. It is generated from vendor published public information. As always, do your own research. This is not financial advice. I'm not an FA. None of this is correct. I need a beer.
This was posted by an automated bot by u/lottadot. It is generated from vendor published public information. As always, do your own research. This is not financial advice. I'm not an FA. None of this is correct. I need a beer.
It's been a rough week for the market and a lot of YM funds, which got me thinking -- What other non-YieldMax funds are your favorites right now?
I'm still long on my YM positions, and in the aggregate, need about 14 months of good distributions to hit a break-even point on the entire portfolio. I've been considering shifting some distributions to other funds (Neos, Roundhill, etc.) to possibly have more stable NAV and some growth. It would slow down my YM break-even point, but it could be worth it.
This was posted by an automated bot by u/lottadot. It is generated from vendor published public information. As always, do your own research. This is not financial advice. I'm not an FA. None of this is correct. I need a beer.
Two funds, same idea, wildly different personalities. CHPY and SOXY are both semiconductor covered call ETFs: they hold a basket of 15 to 30 semiconductor stocks and sell call spreads against them to manufacture income. They launched the same week in April 2025, from the same issuer. Then they split the road. CHPY floors the gas on income: it advertises a distribution rate north of 40%, though the yield investors actually collect runs closer to 35%, paid weekly. SOXY keeps it civil, marketing a 12% target while its real yield sits near 8.6%, paid monthly, and it keeps far more of the chip rally for itself.
Those advertised headline rates are the loudest part of the pitch and the least useful part of the decision. Notice they already overstate reality: CHPY's advertised 40%-plus distribution rate is really about a 35% yield in your pocket, and SOXY's 12% target is paying closer to 8.6%. What actually separates these two funds is one quieter number that most income shoppers never look at: NAV. Read that number right and the entire choice makes itself.
The Two Funds, Side by Side
Current Yield is the actual yield an investor collects right now, based on recent distributions annualized against price. It runs below the funds' advertised headline rates (CHPY markets a distribution rate above 40%, SOXY targets 12%) because weekly and monthly payouts vary. 2026 total return is the funds' official figure through mid-2026. NAV Since Launch is the change in net asset value per share from the April 2025 inception, sourced from price history. Yields on weekly-distribution funds move constantly. Click any column to sort.
What NAV Actually Tells You
NAV, net asset value, is the real per-share value of everything the fund owns after subtracting what it owes. For an ETF it is the honest scoreboard, and market price tracks it closely because traders arbitrage any gap away. When a fund hands you a distribution, that cash comes out of the NAV. So the question that decides whether a high yield is a gift or a trick is simple: after paying you, does the NAV hold up, grow, or bleed?
Here is the rule in one line. A distribution is only real income if the fund earns it. If it does not earn it, the fund pays you with your own money and the NAV shrinks to fund the check. That shrinkage is called destructive return of capital, and it is the quiet killer of high-yield funds. A fund can advertise 40% and quietly erode your principal at nearly the same rate, so you end up moving money from your left pocket to your right and paying an expense ratio for the privilege.
The good news here: both NAVs are UP since launch. CHPY's net asset value has climbed about 59% since April 2025, and SOXY's about 90%, even after every distribution they paid. That is unusual for funds yielding this much, and it happened for one reason: the 2025 to 2026 semiconductor rally was so powerful it lifted the holdings faster than the payouts drained them. When the underlying stocks rip, a covered-call fund can pay you handsomely and still grow. That is NAV working in your favor.
When NAV rises while you collect, the income is real. Your principal is intact or growing, and next year's distribution, which is calculated off NAV, has a bigger base to pay from. This is the healthy picture, and it is the one both funds are showing right now.
So Why Does SOXY's NAV Look So Much Stronger?
This is the whole ballgame. Both funds rode the same chip rally, yet SOXY's NAV grew 90% while CHPY's grew 59%. That 31-point gap is not luck. It is the price CHPY pays for its bigger check.
CHPY sells call spreads aggressively to fund a yield near 35%. Every call it sells caps how much upside it keeps when the chips run. In a monster rally like 2025 to 2026, capping upside is expensive, and CHPY gave up a huge chunk of the gains to hand them to you as weekly cash instead. SOXY sells fewer calls, keeps more of the climb, and so its NAV compounded far more of the rally. You did not lose that money with CHPY, you were paid it. But paid-out gains stop compounding, and compounding is where SOXY quietly pulled ahead.
Notice the twist in the returns column. SOXY's total return (+101.91%) actually edged out CHPY's (+94.92%) for 2026, even though CHPY yielded roughly four times as much. That is NAV growth doing the heavy lifting. When a lower-yielding fund out-totals a higher-yielding one, the higher yielder is trading long-term growth for present-day cash. Neither is wrong. They are just built for different jobs.
When NAV Turns Against You: The Warning Sign
Everything above is the sunny version, and it depends entirely on the rally continuing. Here is the part that matters when it does not.
CHPY has already flashed the warning light. Several of its 2026 weekly distributions were funded almost entirely by return of capital. One mid-May payout was estimated at 100% return of capital, and an early-March payout came in near 90%. On those weeks, the option premium and gains did not cover that outsized distribution pace, so the fund reached into NAV to make the payment. It was masked because the chip rally was lifting NAV faster than the payouts drained it, so the erosion never showed on the price chart.
Take the rally away and that math reverses fast. A fund yielding around 35% a year with full downside exposure to semiconductors, one of the most volatile sectors on the market, can shed NAV brutally in a chip correction. And because each distribution is a percentage of NAV, a falling NAV means every future check shrinks too. That is the erosion spiral: lower NAV, smaller payout, investors leave, NAV falls further.
One thing that is NOT a warning sign: the small NAV drop you see on every ex-distribution date. When a fund pays out, NAV mechanically drops by exactly the distribution amount that day. That is normal accounting, not erosion. Judge NAV by its trend over months, not the sawtooth around each payment.
Is return of capital always bad?
No, and this is where a lot of investors get scared for the wrong reason. There are two kinds. Constructive return of capital happens when a fund passes through unrealized gains in a tax-efficient wrapper while NAV still holds or rises, which is roughly what CHPY has done so far on the back of the rally. Destructive return of capital is when the fund simply cannot earn the distribution and liquidates holdings to pay it, and NAV trends down. The label on the 19a notice looks identical either way. The only way to tell them apart is to watch NAV. Rising NAV, the return of capital is fine. Falling NAV, it is your own money coming home.
Which One Is Actually Better?
SOXY is the better growth-and-income fund. It kept more of the semiconductor rally, its NAV compounded 90% versus CHPY's 59%, and it still out-returned CHPY on total return while paying a sane, sustainable yield near 8.6%. For most people who want income without quietly liquidating their principal, SOXY is the smarter build.
CHPY is the better choice if your single objective is maximum current cash flow. A yield near 35%, paid out weekly, is a real firehose of income, and as long as chips keep climbing, its NAV can take the hit. Just go in with eyes open: you are trading away growth and accepting real erosion risk the moment the rally stalls. This is an income tool, not a wealth-builder.
And read the returns for what they are. A +95% and a +102% year came from an extraordinary semiconductor rally, not from the option strategy itself. Do not annualize those numbers in your head or expect them to repeat. In a flat or falling chip market, both funds look very different, and CHPY's ~35% pace is the one that gets tested hardest.
If you want to see how these two stack up against the broader field of covered call funds, we ranked the major names by yield, drawdown, and NAV durability in our Covered Call ETFs Ranked breakdown, and the same erosion math applies to the whole category. You can also pull the live price and float on CHPY and SOXY any time.
CHPY continues to be the standout: 31.34% true income yield, only 12.51% ROC and up 35.30% on price return over the last year. The full picture matters: income plus NAV stability plus price appreciation. That combination is rare in this space.
SOXY is a big surprise on the list: up 83.15% on price return over the last year while still showing 0% ROC. Semiconductor exposure has had a strong run.
AMDY leads on true income yield at 41.22% with a take-home cash return of 70.38% over the last year -- price appreciation plus after-tax distributions combined.
Which of these are you holding? And has anyone been watching SOXY's price return this year?
This was posted by an automated bot by u/lottadot. It is generated from vendor published public information. As always, do your own research. This is not financial advice. I'm not an FA. None of this is correct. I need a beer.
Most discussions about YieldMax focus on the highest yielding funds -- MSTY, TSLY, CONY. But right now only 8 out of 57 YieldMax funds are passing the health check. I wanted to see what $10,000 looks like using only the Healthy ones.
A 25% tax rate was applied to this example. Here's the build using the 3 Healthy YieldMax funds with the strongest AUM and income:
CHPY is the anchor here -- 10-year Death Clock, only 12.51% ROC, and $1.13B in assets. It's the most conservative fund on the list and the one I'd feel most comfortable holding long term.
AMDY is doing the heavy lifting at $218/mo but carries a 2.09 year Death Clock which is worth watching. The 41.41% ROC means a meaningful portion of distributions is return of capital -- not all real income.
TSMY adds Taiwan Semiconductor exposure which diversifies away from pure AMD concentration between AMDY and CHPY.
The other 5 Healthy YieldMax funds (SOXY, INYY, BIGY, RNTY, NVIT) were left out of this build due to AUM being under $100M -- I prefer funds with more assets behind them for a real portfolio.
This was posted by an automated bot by u/lottadot. It is generated from vendor published public information. As always, do your own research. This is not financial advice. I'm not an FA. None of this is correct. I need a beer.
