QUSA vs. BTCI

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

QUSA (VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF) and BTCI (NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QUSA is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by VistaShares, while BTCI is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Neos. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QUSA returned 2.81% vs -41.62% for BTCI. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QUSA charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for BTCI.

Performance

QUSA vs. BTCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF (QUSA) and NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QUSA achieves a 8.31% return, which is significantly higher than BTCI's -24.82% return.

QUSA

• 1D: -1.19%
• 1M: -0.89%
• 6M: 6.46%
• YTD: 8.31%
• 1Y: 2.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BTCI

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: -1.36%
• 6M: -30.24%
• YTD: -24.82%
• 1Y: -41.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QUSA vs. BTCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QUSA VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF	8.31%	-3.27%
BTCI NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF	-24.82%	-4.01%

Correlation

The correlation between QUSA and BTCI is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2025	0.31

Return for Risk

QUSA vs. BTCI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

QUSA

QUSA Risk / Return Rank: 14
QUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
QUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
QUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 13
QUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
QUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 14

BTCI

BTCI Risk / Return Rank: 2
BTCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
BTCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
BTCI Omega Ratio Rank: 2
BTCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
BTCI Martin Ratio Rank: 2

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

QUSA vs. BTCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF (QUSA) and NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	QUSA	BTCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.26	-1.05	+1.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.45	-1.53	+1.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	0.82	+0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.28	-0.86	+1.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.66	-1.41	+2.07

QUSA vs. BTCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QUSA Sharpe Ratio is 0.26, which is higher than the BTCI Sharpe Ratio of -1.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QUSA and BTCI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

QUSA vs. BTCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QUSA drawdown since its inception was -10.64%, smaller than the maximum BTCI drawdown of -48.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QUSA and BTCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	QUSA	BTCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.64%	-48.42%	+37.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.12%	-48.42%	+38.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.98%	-44.41%	+41.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.60%	-17.21%	+13.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.25%	29.52%	-25.27%

Volatility

QUSA vs. BTCI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF (QUSA) is 3.70%, while NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI) has a volatility of 9.62%. This indicates that QUSA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BTCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QUSA	BTCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.70%	9.62%	-5.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.06%	31.46%	-22.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.96%	39.86%	-28.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.74%	39.99%	-29.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.74%	39.99%	-29.25%

QUSA vs. BTCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

QUSA has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than BTCI's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

QUSA vs. BTCI - Dividend Comparison

QUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.08%, less than BTCI's 42.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BTCI NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF	42.73%	36.46%	6.76%
QUSA VistaShares Target 15™ USA Quality Income ETF	14.08%	6.61%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QUSA and BTCI in my portfolio?

QUSA and BTCI have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QUSA or BTCI?

BTCI has higher volatility (9.62%) compared to QUSA (3.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QUSA dropped -10.64% vs BTCI's -48.42%.

Which ETF is better, QUSA or BTCI?

On 1-year performance, QUSA leads with 2.81% vs -41.62% for BTCI. On fees, QUSA is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, QUSA has been the lower-risk option at 3.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QUSA or BTCI?

Over the 1-year period, QUSA has performed better with a 2.81% return vs -41.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QUSA or BTCI?

QUSA is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for BTCI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QUSA or BTCI?

BTCI has the higher dividend yield at 42.73%, compared with 14.08% for QUSA.

What is the main difference between QUSA and BTCI?

QUSA is categorized as Derivative Income, while BTCI is Cryptocurrency. They also come from different issuers: VistaShares and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for QUSA and 0.99% for BTCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QUSA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.26 vs -1.05), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.