The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0127. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+62.18%cumulative total return
#1 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
0 investments have a higher return.
(1 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0000
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+163.97%cumulative total return
#2 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
1 investment has a higher return.
(2 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.0127
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0000, 0.0127)≈ 0.0127
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0000 + 0.0127≈ 0.0127
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
STK places #1 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0127. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For STK, the longer total-return tie-break is +21.4540% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +62.1789% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+62.2%
Price83% of return+51.8%
Dividend17% of return+10.4%
#1 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+164.0%+21.5% / yr annualized
Price36% of return+59.2%
Dividend64% of return+104.8%
#2 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
Both periods have the same standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0412. Lower scores rank first.
Provisional · under 1 yearSee ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
11.5 months since inception
Sep 30, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+35.22%cumulative total return
#5 of 98 eligible investments on these dates.
4 investments have a higher return.
(5 − 1) ÷ (98 − 1)≈ 0.0412
02 · Longer period
11.5 months since inception
Sep 30, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+35.22%cumulative total return
#5 of 98 eligible investments on these dates.
4 investments have a higher return.
(5 − 1) ÷ (98 − 1)≈ 0.0412
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0412, 0.0412)≈ 0.0412
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0412 + 0.0412≈ 0.0825
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
KSLV places #2 of 100
Both periods have the same standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0412. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For KSLV, the longer total-return tie-break is +35.2156% cumulative (under one year); the recent total-return tie-break is +35.2156% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
Provisional rank. This investment has less than one year of history, so both periods use the same available dates. They are not two independent track records.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
11.5 MONTHS TOTAL RETURN+35.2%Since inception
Price15% of return+5.4%
Dividend85% of return+29.8%
#5 return rank · 98 peers
11.5 MONTHS TOTAL RETURN+35.2%Since inception
Price15% of return+5.4%
Dividend85% of return+29.8%
#5 return rank · 98 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0729. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+26.94%cumulative total return
#8 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
7 investments have a higher return.
(8 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0729
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+98.48%cumulative total return
#6 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
5 investments have a higher return.
(6 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.0633
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0729, 0.0633)≈ 0.0729
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0729 + 0.0633≈ 0.1362
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
VYMI places #3 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0729. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For VYMI, the longer total-return tie-break is +14.7142% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +26.9429% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
International high-dividend stocks broaden the geographic sources of portfolio income.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0759. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+27.23%cumulative total return
#6 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
5 investments have a higher return.
(6 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0521
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+96.56%cumulative total return
#7 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
6 investments have a higher return.
(7 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.0759
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0521, 0.0759)≈ 0.0759
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0521 + 0.0759≈ 0.1280
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
IDV places #4 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0759. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For IDV, the longer total-return tie-break is +14.4910% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +27.2279% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+27.2%
Price74% of return+20.2%
Dividend26% of return+7.0%
#6 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+96.6%+14.5% / yr annualized
Price43% of return+41.8%
Dividend57% of return+54.8%
#7 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0833. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+25.32%cumulative total return
#9 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
8 investments have a higher return.
(9 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0833
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+182.61%cumulative total return
#1 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
0 investments have a higher return.
(1 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.0000
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0833, 0.0000)≈ 0.0833
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0833 + 0.0000≈ 0.0833
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
MLPX places #5 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.0833. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For MLPX, the longer total-return tie-break is +23.1255% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +25.3200% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Midstream corporations and MLPs provide an energy-infrastructure income comparison.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1013. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+25.20%cumulative total return
#10 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
9 investments have a higher return.
(10 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0938
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+94.47%cumulative total return
#9 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
8 investments have a higher return.
(9 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.1013
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0938, 0.1013)≈ 0.1013
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0938 + 0.1013≈ 0.1950
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
ADX places #6 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1013. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For ADX, the longer total-return tie-break is +14.2463% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +25.1960% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+25.2%
Price62% of return+15.7%
Dividend38% of return+9.5%
#10 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+94.5%+14.2% / yr annualized
Price30% of return+28.8%
Dividend70% of return+65.7%
#9 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
Both periods have the same standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1020. Lower scores rank first.
Provisional · under 1 yearSee ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
9 months since inception
Dec 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+19.72%cumulative total return
#11 of 99 eligible investments on these dates.
10 investments have a higher return.
(11 − 1) ÷ (99 − 1)≈ 0.1020
02 · Longer period
9 months since inception
Dec 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+19.72%cumulative total return
#11 of 99 eligible investments on these dates.
10 investments have a higher return.
(11 − 1) ÷ (99 − 1)≈ 0.1020
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1020, 0.1020)≈ 0.1020
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1020 + 0.1020≈ 0.2041
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
MLPI places #7 of 100
Both periods have the same standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1020. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For MLPI, the longer total-return tie-break is +19.7233% cumulative (under one year); the recent total-return tie-break is +19.7233% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
Provisional rank. This investment has less than one year of history, so both periods use the same available dates. They are not two independent track records.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
9 MONTHS TOTAL RETURN+19.7%Since inception
Price30% of return+6.0%
Dividend70% of return+13.7%
#11 return rank · 99 peers
9 MONTHS TOTAL RETURN+19.7%Since inception
Price30% of return+6.0%
Dividend70% of return+13.7%
#11 return rank · 99 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1042. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+24.48%cumulative total return
#11 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
10 investments have a higher return.
(11 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1042
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+161.33%cumulative total return
#3 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
2 investments have a higher return.
(3 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.0253
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1042, 0.0253)≈ 0.1042
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1042 + 0.0253≈ 0.1295
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
AMLP places #8 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1042. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For AMLP, the longer total-return tie-break is +21.2100% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +24.4785% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Energy-infrastructure MLP distributions offer a distinct cash-flow source.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1250. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+23.10%cumulative total return
#13 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
12 investments have a higher return.
(13 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1250
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+148.23%cumulative total return
#4 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
3 investments have a higher return.
(4 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.0380
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1250, 0.0380)≈ 0.1250
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1250 + 0.0380≈ 0.1630
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
MLPA places #9 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1250. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For MLPA, the longer total-return tie-break is +19.9682% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +23.0951% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Direct MLP exposure adds a distribution-oriented infrastructure sleeve; compare fund-level tax effects.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1266. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+58.52%cumulative total return
#2 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
1 investment has a higher return.
(2 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0104
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+89.52%cumulative total return
#11 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
10 investments have a higher return.
(11 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.1266
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0104, 0.1266)≈ 0.1266
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0104 + 0.1266≈ 0.1370
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
JNJ places #10 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1266. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For JNJ, the longer total-return tie-break is +13.6573% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +58.5177% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+58.5%
Price94% of return+55.0%
Dividend6% of return+3.5%
#2 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+89.5%+13.7% / yr annualized
Price72% of return+64.8%
Dividend28% of return+24.7%
#11 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1392. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+36.32%cumulative total return
#4 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
3 investments have a higher return.
(4 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0313
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+88.97%cumulative total return
#12 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
11 investments have a higher return.
(12 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.1392
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0313, 0.1392)≈ 0.1392
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0313 + 0.1392≈ 0.1705
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
KO places #11 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1392. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For KO, the longer total-return tie-break is +13.5915% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +36.3166% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+36.3%
Price90% of return+32.8%
Dividend10% of return+3.5%
#4 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+89.0%+13.6% / yr annualized
Price71% of return+63.2%
Dividend29% of return+25.7%
#12 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1519. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+23.90%cumulative total return
#12 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
11 investments have a higher return.
(12 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1146
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+88.20%cumulative total return
#13 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
12 investments have a higher return.
(13 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.1519
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1146, 0.1519)≈ 0.1519
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1146 + 0.1519≈ 0.2665
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
CII places #12 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1519. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For CII, the longer total-return tie-break is +13.4986% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +23.9027% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Large-cap stock selection with options offers a manager comparison for income and total return.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1667. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+21.50%cumulative total return
#17 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
16 investments have a higher return.
(17 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1667
02 · Longer period
4 years since inception
Sep 8, 2022 – Sep 18, 2026
+114.54%cumulative total return
#6 of 84 eligible investments on these dates.
5 investments have a higher return.
(6 − 1) ÷ (84 − 1)≈ 0.0602
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1667, 0.0602)≈ 0.1667
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1667 + 0.0602≈ 0.2269
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
IDVO places #13 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1667. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For IDVO, the longer total-return tie-break is +20.8685% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +21.4981% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+21.5%
Price67% of return+14.4%
Dividend33% of return+7.1%
#17 return rank · 97 peers
4 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+114.5%Since inception+20.9% / yr annualized
Price60% of return+68.6%
Dividend40% of return+45.9%
#6 return rank · 84 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
4 years chart* · IDVO +114.5%S&P 500 (SPY) +101.2%
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1771. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+21.44%cumulative total return
#18 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
17 investments have a higher return.
(18 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1771
02 · Longer period
2.8 years since inception
Oct 27, 2023 – Sep 18, 2026
+97.64%cumulative total return
#11 of 90 eligible investments on these dates.
10 investments have a higher return.
(11 − 1) ÷ (90 − 1)≈ 0.1124
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1771, 0.1124)≈ 0.1771
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1771 + 0.1124≈ 0.2894
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
GPIQ places #14 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1771. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For GPIQ, the longer total-return tie-break is +26.5429% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +21.4384% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+21.4%
Price43% of return+9.3%
Dividend57% of return+12.1%
#18 return rank · 97 peers
2.8 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+97.6%Since inception+26.5% / yr annualized
Price48% of return+46.7%
Dividend52% of return+51.0%
#11 return rank · 90 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
2.8 years chart* · GPIQ +97.6%S&P 500 (SPY) +92.3%
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1772. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+22.23%cumulative total return
#15 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
14 investments have a higher return.
(15 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1458
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+86.20%cumulative total return
#15 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
14 investments have a higher return.
(15 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.1772
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1458, 0.1772)≈ 0.1772
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1458 + 0.1772≈ 0.3230
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
QYLG places #15 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1772. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For QYLG, the longer total-return tie-break is +13.2555% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +22.2318% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Partial Nasdaq call coverage retains more market participation than a fully overwritten portfolio.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1875. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+20.87%cumulative total return
#19 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
18 investments have a higher return.
(19 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1875
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+95.53%cumulative total return
#8 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
7 investments have a higher return.
(8 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.0886
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1875, 0.0886)≈ 0.1875
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1875 + 0.0886≈ 0.2761
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
GAIN places #16 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1875. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For GAIN, the longer total-return tie-break is +14.3702% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +20.8719% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Buyout-related debt and equity introduce capital-gain potential alongside cash income.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2025. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+21.86%cumulative total return
#16 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
15 investments have a higher return.
(16 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1563
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+82.99%cumulative total return
#17 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
16 investments have a higher return.
(17 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.2025
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1563, 0.2025)≈ 0.2025
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1563 + 0.2025≈ 0.3588
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
HDV places #17 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2025. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For HDV, the longer total-return tie-break is +12.8621% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +21.8585% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
High-dividend U.S. stocks provide an income-oriented alternative to option overlays.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2083. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+19.17%cumulative total return
#21 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
20 investments have a higher return.
(21 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2083
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+89.94%cumulative total return
#10 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
9 investments have a higher return.
(10 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.1139
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2083, 0.1139)≈ 0.2083
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2083 + 0.1139≈ 0.3223
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
OVL places #18 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2083. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For OVL, the longer total-return tie-break is +13.7077% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +19.1742% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+19.2%
Price49% of return+9.5%
Dividend51% of return+9.7%
#21 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+89.9%+13.7% / yr annualized
Price57% of return+51.2%
Dividend43% of return+38.7%
#10 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2188. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+19.06%cumulative total return
#22 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
21 investments have a higher return.
(22 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2188
02 · Longer period
1.1 years since inception
Jul 9, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+29.86%cumulative total return
#10 of 96 eligible investments on these dates.
9 investments have a higher return.
(10 − 1) ÷ (96 − 1)≈ 0.0947
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2188, 0.0947)≈ 0.2188
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2188 + 0.0947≈ 0.3135
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
KGLD places #19 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2188. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For KGLD, the longer total-return tie-break is +24.4689% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +19.0560% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+19.1%
Price18% of return+3.4%
Dividend82% of return+15.7%
#22 return rank · 97 peers
1.1 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+29.9%Since inception+24.5% / yr annualized
Price35% of return+10.6%
Dividend65% of return+19.3%
#10 return rank · 96 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
1.1 years chart* · KGLD +29.9%S&P 500 (SPY) +23.7%
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2292. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+18.55%cumulative total return
#23 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
22 investments have a higher return.
(23 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2292
02 · Longer period
4.3 years since inception
May 4, 2022 – Sep 18, 2026
+91.68%cumulative total return
#9 of 83 eligible investments on these dates.
8 investments have a higher return.
(9 − 1) ÷ (83 − 1)≈ 0.0976
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2292, 0.0976)≈ 0.2292
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2292 + 0.0976≈ 0.3267
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
JEPQ places #20 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2292. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For JEPQ, the longer total-return tie-break is +16.0339% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +18.5468% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Nasdaq-oriented equities plus option income provide a growth-heavy counterpart to broader equity-income funds.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2500. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+17.87%cumulative total return
#25 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
24 investments have a higher return.
(25 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2500
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+87.72%cumulative total return
#14 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
13 investments have a higher return.
(14 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.1646
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2500, 0.1646)≈ 0.2500
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2500 + 0.1646≈ 0.4146
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
CEFS places #21 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2500. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For CEFS, the longer total-return tie-break is +13.4411% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +17.8718% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+17.9%
Price51% of return+9.2%
Dividend49% of return+8.7%
#25 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+87.7%+13.4% / yr annualized
Price20% of return+17.7%
Dividend80% of return+70.0%
#14 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2785. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+17.22%cumulative total return
#26 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
25 investments have a higher return.
(26 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2604
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+67.70%cumulative total return
#23 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
22 investments have a higher return.
(23 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.2785
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2604, 0.2785)≈ 0.2785
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2604 + 0.2785≈ 0.5389
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
XYLG places #22 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2785. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For XYLG, the longer total-return tie-break is +10.9074% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +17.2202% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Partial S&P 500 call coverage offers a middle ground between premium income and equity growth.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2813. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+17.00%cumulative total return
#28 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
27 investments have a higher return.
(28 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2813
02 · Longer period
2.8 years since inception
Oct 27, 2023 – Sep 18, 2026
+81.74%cumulative total return
#19 of 90 eligible investments on these dates.
18 investments have a higher return.
(19 − 1) ÷ (90 − 1)≈ 0.2022
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2813, 0.2022)≈ 0.2813
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2813 + 0.2022≈ 0.4835
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
GPIX places #23 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.2813. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For GPIX, the longer total-return tie-break is +22.9277% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +16.9964% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+17.0%
Price44% of return+7.4%
Dividend56% of return+9.6%
#28 return rank · 97 peers
2.8 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+81.7%Since inception+22.9% / yr annualized
Price52% of return+42.8%
Dividend48% of return+39.0%
#19 return rank · 90 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
2.8 years chart* · GPIX +81.7%S&P 500 (SPY) +92.3%
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3021. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.68%cumulative total return
#30 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
29 investments have a higher return.
(30 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3021
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+67.01%cumulative total return
#24 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
23 investments have a higher return.
(24 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.2911
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3021, 0.2911)≈ 0.3021
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3021 + 0.2911≈ 0.5932
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
DVY places #24 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3021. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For DVY, the longer total-return tie-break is +10.8165% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +16.6775% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Dividend-paying U.S. equities offer a different sector mix from broad market portfolios.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3125. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.58%cumulative total return
#31 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
30 investments have a higher return.
(31 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3125
02 · Longer period
2.1 years since inception
Jul 23, 2024 – Sep 18, 2026
+49.68%cumulative total return
#10 of 92 eligible investments on these dates.
9 investments have a higher return.
(10 − 1) ÷ (92 − 1)≈ 0.0989
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3125, 0.0989)≈ 0.3125
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3125 + 0.0989≈ 0.4114
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
KQQQ places #25 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3125. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For KQQQ, the longer total-return tie-break is +20.5859% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +16.5818% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+16.6%
Price-6% of return-1.0%
Dividend106% of return+17.6%
#31 return rank · 97 peers
2.1 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+49.7%Since inception+20.6% / yr annualized
Price33% of return+16.2%
Dividend67% of return+33.5%
#10 return rank · 92 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
2.1 years chart* · KQQQ +49.7%S&P 500 (SPY) +41.1%
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3165. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+27.20%cumulative total return
#7 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
6 investments have a higher return.
(7 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0625
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+62.12%cumulative total return
#26 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
25 investments have a higher return.
(26 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.3165
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0625, 0.3165)≈ 0.3165
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0625 + 0.3165≈ 0.3790
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
SCHD places #26 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3165. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For SCHD, the longer total-return tie-break is +10.1584% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +27.2017% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+27.2%
Price83% of return+22.7%
Dividend17% of return+4.5%
#7 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+62.1%+10.2% / yr annualized
Price57% of return+35.6%
Dividend43% of return+26.5%
#26 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3229. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.32%cumulative total return
#32 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
31 investments have a higher return.
(32 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3229
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+70.60%cumulative total return
#21 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
20 investments have a higher return.
(21 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.2532
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3229, 0.2532)≈ 0.3229
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3229 + 0.2532≈ 0.5761
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
DGRO places #27 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3229. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For DGRO, the longer total-return tie-break is +11.2884% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +16.3212% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Dividend growth and sustainability screens create a broad equity-income comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3646. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+15.98%cumulative total return
#36 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
35 investments have a higher return.
(36 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3646
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+79.44%cumulative total return
#18 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
17 investments have a higher return.
(18 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.2152
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3646, 0.2152)≈ 0.3646
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3646 + 0.2152≈ 0.5798
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
VYM places #28 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3646. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For VYM, the longer total-return tie-break is +12.4205% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +15.9803% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+16.0%
Price78% of return+12.5%
Dividend22% of return+3.4%
#36 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+79.4%+12.4% / yr annualized
Price70% of return+55.4%
Dividend30% of return+24.1%
#18 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3671. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+17.12%cumulative total return
#27 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
26 investments have a higher return.
(27 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2708
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+56.52%cumulative total return
#30 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
29 investments have a higher return.
(30 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.3671
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2708, 0.3671)≈ 0.3671
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2708 + 0.3671≈ 0.6379
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
ETG places #29 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3671. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For ETG, the longer total-return tie-break is +9.3856% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +17.1216% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Global dividend-oriented equity investing adds a leveraged international comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3750. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+15.00%cumulative total return
#37 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
36 investments have a higher return.
(37 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3750
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+68.21%cumulative total return
#22 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
21 investments have a higher return.
(22 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.2658
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3750, 0.2658)≈ 0.3750
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3750 + 0.2658≈ 0.6408
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
CSQ places #30 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3750. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For CSQ, the longer total-return tie-break is +10.9753% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +15.0043% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Equities and convertible bonds blend capital appreciation with distributed income.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3797. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+19.87%cumulative total return
#20 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
19 investments have a higher return.
(20 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1979
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+56.36%cumulative total return
#31 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
30 investments have a higher return.
(31 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.3797
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1979, 0.3797)≈ 0.3797
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1979 + 0.3797≈ 0.5777
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
SCHY places #31 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3797. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For SCHY, the longer total-return tie-break is +9.3629% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +19.8741% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
International dividend stocks with quality screens diversify the U.S. income allocation.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3924. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.94%cumulative total return
#29 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
28 investments have a higher return.
(29 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2917
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+56.10%cumulative total return
#32 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
31 investments have a higher return.
(32 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.3924
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2917, 0.3924)≈ 0.3924
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2917 + 0.3924≈ 0.6841
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
BDJ places #32 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3924. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For BDJ, the longer total-return tie-break is +9.3276% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +16.9353% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Dividend stocks and an option overlay offer a broad equity-income comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3958. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+14.57%cumulative total return
#39 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
38 investments have a higher return.
(39 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3958
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+74.49%cumulative total return
#20 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
19 investments have a higher return.
(20 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.2405
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3958, 0.2405)≈ 0.3958
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3958 + 0.2405≈ 0.6363
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
DIVO places #33 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3958. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For DIVO, the longer total-return tie-break is +11.7922% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +14.5726% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+14.6%
Price50% of return+7.3%
Dividend50% of return+7.3%
#39 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+74.5%+11.8% / yr annualized
Price47% of return+34.7%
Dividend53% of return+39.8%
#20 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3958. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+14.92%cumulative total return
#38 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
37 investments have a higher return.
(38 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3854
02 · Longer period
1 year since inception
Sep 17, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+15.33%cumulative total return
#39 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
38 investments have a higher return.
(39 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3958
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3854, 0.3958)≈ 0.3958
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3854 + 0.3958≈ 0.7813
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
NIHI places #34 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.3958. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For NIHI, the longer total-return tie-break is +15.2975% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +14.9169% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+14.9%
Price19% of return+2.8%
Dividend81% of return+12.1%
#38 return rank · 97 peers
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+15.3%Since inception+15.3% / yr annualized
Price20% of return+3.1%
Dividend80% of return+12.2%
#39 return rank · 97 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4051. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+37.14%cumulative total return
#3 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
2 investments have a higher return.
(3 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0208
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+53.53%cumulative total return
#33 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
32 investments have a higher return.
(33 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.4051
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0208, 0.4051)≈ 0.4051
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0208 + 0.4051≈ 0.4259
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
BST places #35 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4051. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For BST, the longer total-return tie-break is +8.9647% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +37.1443% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Technology shares and options add a growth-oriented income comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4063. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+14.25%cumulative total return
#40 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
39 investments have a higher return.
(40 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4063
02 · Longer period
2 years since inception
Aug 22, 2024 – Sep 18, 2026
+48.65%cumulative total return
#13 of 93 eligible investments on these dates.
12 investments have a higher return.
(13 − 1) ÷ (93 − 1)≈ 0.1304
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4063, 0.1304)≈ 0.4063
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4063 + 0.1304≈ 0.5367
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
QDVO places #36 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4063. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For QDVO, the longer total-return tie-break is +21.0788% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +14.2457% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+14.2%
Price17% of return+2.5%
Dividend83% of return+11.8%
#40 return rank · 97 peers
2 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+48.7%Since inception+21.1% / yr annualized
Price44% of return+21.2%
Dividend56% of return+27.4%
#13 return rank · 93 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4167. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+14.15%cumulative total return
#41 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
40 investments have a higher return.
(41 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4167
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+62.05%cumulative total return
#27 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
26 investments have a higher return.
(27 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.3291
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4167, 0.3291)≈ 0.4167
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4167 + 0.3291≈ 0.7458
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
CSWC places #37 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4167. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For CSWC, the longer total-return tie-break is +10.1486% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +14.1495% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Lower-middle-market lending provides an internally managed BDC comparison.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4177. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+23.02%cumulative total return
#14 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
13 investments have a higher return.
(14 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.1354
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+52.68%cumulative total return
#34 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
33 investments have a higher return.
(34 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.4177
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.1354, 0.4177)≈ 0.4177
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.1354 + 0.4177≈ 0.5531
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
QYLD places #38 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4177. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For QYLD, the longer total-return tie-break is +8.8435% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +23.0246% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Full Nasdaq call coverage is a useful high-payout comparison for measuring the cost of surrendered upside.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4375. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+12.11%cumulative total return
#43 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
42 investments have a higher return.
(43 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4375
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+52.42%cumulative total return
#35 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
34 investments have a higher return.
(35 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.4304
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4375, 0.4304)≈ 0.4375
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4375 + 0.4304≈ 0.8679
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
SPYD places #39 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4375. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For SPYD, the longer total-return tie-break is +8.8062% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +12.1102% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
High-yield S&P 500 stocks provide a transparent comparison for current income.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4479. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+11.70%cumulative total return
#44 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
43 investments have a higher return.
(44 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4479
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+66.31%cumulative total return
#25 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
24 investments have a higher return.
(25 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.3038
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4479, 0.3038)≈ 0.4479
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4479 + 0.3038≈ 0.7517
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
VIG places #40 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4479. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For VIG, the longer total-return tie-break is +10.7231% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +11.6994% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Dividend-growth screening provides a lower-payout, compounding-oriented reference.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4583. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+11.58%cumulative total return
#45 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
44 investments have a higher return.
(45 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4583
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+78.18%cumulative total return
#19 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
18 investments have a higher return.
(19 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.2278
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4583, 0.2278)≈ 0.4583
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4583 + 0.2278≈ 0.6862
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
DGRW places #41 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4583. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For DGRW, the longer total-return tie-break is +12.2623% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +11.5786% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Quality and growth screens add a dividend-equity comparison beyond yield alone.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4684. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+17.94%cumulative total return
#24 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
23 investments have a higher return.
(24 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.2396
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+47.08%cumulative total return
#38 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
37 investments have a higher return.
(38 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.4684
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.2396, 0.4684)≈ 0.4684
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.2396 + 0.4684≈ 0.7079
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
XYLD places #42 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4684. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For XYLD, the longer total-return tie-break is +8.0312% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +17.9363% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Broad U.S. equity exposure with index calls offers a rules-based option-income comparison.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4810. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+12.70%cumulative total return
#42 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
41 investments have a higher return.
(42 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4271
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+46.48%cumulative total return
#39 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
38 investments have a higher return.
(39 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.4810
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4271, 0.4810)≈ 0.4810
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4271 + 0.4810≈ 0.9081
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
ETB places #43 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4810. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For ETB, the longer total-return tie-break is +7.9428% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +12.7024% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
A buy-write equity portfolio provides a long-history option-income benchmark.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4937. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+10.65%cumulative total return
#46 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
45 investments have a higher return.
(46 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4688
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+45.29%cumulative total return
#40 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
39 investments have a higher return.
(40 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.4937
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4688, 0.4937)≈ 0.4937
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4688 + 0.4937≈ 0.9624
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
SDY places #44 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.4937. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For SDY, the longer total-return tie-break is +7.7674% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +10.6487% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
A long-record dividend-growth index offers an equity income and total-return reference.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5208. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+7.02%cumulative total return
#51 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
50 investments have a higher return.
(51 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5208
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+43.26%cumulative total return
#41 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
40 investments have a higher return.
(41 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.5063
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5208, 0.5063)≈ 0.5208
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5208 + 0.5063≈ 1.0272
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
JEPI places #45 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5208. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For JEPI, the longer total-return tie-break is +7.4639% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +7.0183% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Defensive U.S. equities plus an options overlay offer a comparison for balancing current income with market participation.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5417. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+5.39%cumulative total return
#53 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
52 investments have a higher return.
(53 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5417
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+41.29%cumulative total return
#42 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
41 investments have a higher return.
(42 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.5190
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5417, 0.5190)≈ 0.5417
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5417 + 0.5190≈ 1.0607
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
FOF places #46 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5417. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For FOF, the longer total-return tie-break is +7.1671% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +5.3878% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+5.4%
Price-45% of return-2.4%
Dividend145% of return+7.8%
#53 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+41.3%+7.2% / yr annualized
Price-20% of return-8.1%
Dividend120% of return+49.4%
#42 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5443. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+10.08%cumulative total return
#47 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
46 investments have a higher return.
(47 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4792
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+39.15%cumulative total return
#44 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
43 investments have a higher return.
(44 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.5443
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4792, 0.5443)≈ 0.5443
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4792 + 0.5443≈ 1.0235
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
BUI places #47 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5443. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For BUI, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.8388% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +10.0784% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Utilities and infrastructure with options diversify income beyond pure credit.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5570. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+9.27%cumulative total return
#49 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
48 investments have a higher return.
(49 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5000
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+37.34%cumulative total return
#45 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
44 investments have a higher return.
(45 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.5570
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5000, 0.5570)≈ 0.5570
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5000 + 0.5570≈ 1.0570
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
DNP places #48 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5570. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For DNP, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.5597% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +9.2653% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Utility-oriented investing provides a long-history infrastructure-income comparison.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5696. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+9.90%cumulative total return
#48 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
47 investments have a higher return.
(48 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.4896
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+37.11%cumulative total return
#46 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
45 investments have a higher return.
(46 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.5696
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.4896, 0.5696)≈ 0.5696
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.4896 + 0.5696≈ 1.0592
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
NOBL places #49 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5696. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For NOBL, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.5235% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +9.9006% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Long dividend-increase records offer a transparent comparison for durable equity income.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5729. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+4.88%cumulative total return
#56 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
55 investments have a higher return.
(56 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5729
02 · Longer period
3.6 years since inception
Jan 24, 2023 – Sep 18, 2026
+41.40%cumulative total return
#48 of 88 eligible investments on these dates.
47 investments have a higher return.
(48 − 1) ÷ (88 − 1)≈ 0.5402
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5729, 0.5402)≈ 0.5729
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5729 + 0.5402≈ 1.1131
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
CLOZ places #50 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5729. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For CLOZ, the longer total-return tie-break is +9.9571% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +4.8824% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Mezzanine CLO debt adds an active manager comparison within structured-credit income.
Both periods have the same standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5758. Lower scores rank first.
Provisional · under 1 yearSee ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
7.1 months since inception
Feb 13, 2026 – Sep 18, 2026
+2.11%cumulative total return
#58 of 100 eligible investments on these dates.
57 investments have a higher return.
(58 − 1) ÷ (100 − 1)≈ 0.5758
02 · Longer period
7.1 months since inception
Feb 13, 2026 – Sep 18, 2026
+2.11%cumulative total return
#58 of 100 eligible investments on these dates.
57 investments have a higher return.
(58 − 1) ÷ (100 − 1)≈ 0.5758
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5758, 0.5758)≈ 0.5758
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5758 + 0.5758≈ 1.1515
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
KCOP places #51 of 100
Both periods have the same standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5758. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For KCOP, the longer total-return tie-break is +2.1087% cumulative (under one year); the recent total-return tie-break is +2.1087% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
Provisional rank. This investment has less than one year of history, so both periods use the same available dates. They are not two independent track records.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
7.1 MONTHS TOTAL RETURN+2.1%Since inception
Price-300% of return-6.3%
Dividend400% of return+8.4%
#58 return rank · 100 peers
7.1 MONTHS TOTAL RETURN+2.1%Since inception
Price-300% of return-6.3%
Dividend400% of return+8.4%
#58 return rank · 100 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5823. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.23%cumulative total return
#33 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
32 investments have a higher return.
(33 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3333
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+36.95%cumulative total return
#47 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
46 investments have a higher return.
(47 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.5823
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3333, 0.5823)≈ 0.5823
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3333 + 0.5823≈ 0.9156
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
ETW places #52 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5823. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For ETW, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.4995% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +16.2322% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Global equity exposure and calls diversify the geography of option income.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5833. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+4.86%cumulative total return
#57 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
56 investments have a higher return.
(57 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5833
02 · Longer period
4.6 years since inception
Jan 12, 2022 – Sep 18, 2026
+30.68%cumulative total return
#47 of 82 eligible investments on these dates.
46 investments have a higher return.
(47 − 1) ÷ (82 − 1)≈ 0.5679
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5833, 0.5679)≈ 0.5833
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5833 + 0.5679≈ 1.1512
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
JBBB places #53 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.5833. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For JBBB, the longer total-return tie-break is +5.8815% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +4.8583% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Lower-rated CLO debt provides a higher-risk income comparison to senior AAA tranches.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6353. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.23%cumulative total return
#34 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
33 investments have a higher return.
(34 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3438
02 · Longer period
3.9 years since inception
Oct 5, 2022 – Sep 18, 2026
+46.30%cumulative total return
#55 of 86 eligible investments on these dates.
54 investments have a higher return.
(55 − 1) ÷ (86 − 1)≈ 0.6353
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3438, 0.6353)≈ 0.6353
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3438 + 0.6353≈ 0.9790
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
RYLG places #54 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6353. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For RYLG, the longer total-return tie-break is +10.1016% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +16.2281% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Partial small-cap call coverage adds a different size segment to the income-and-growth comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6563. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+3.45%cumulative total return
#64 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
63 investments have a higher return.
(64 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6563
02 · Longer period
1.6 years since inception
Jan 15, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+12.43%cumulative total return
#52 of 95 eligible investments on these dates.
51 investments have a higher return.
(52 − 1) ÷ (95 − 1)≈ 0.5426
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6563, 0.5426)≈ 0.6563
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6563 + 0.5426≈ 1.1988
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
IYRI places #55 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6563. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For IYRI, the longer total-return tie-break is +7.2542% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +3.4480% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+3.4%
Price-233% of return-8.0%
Dividend333% of return+11.5%
#64 return rank · 97 peers
1.6 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+12.4%Since inception+7.3% / yr annualized
Price-60% of return-7.4%
Dividend160% of return+19.8%
#52 return rank · 95 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
1.6 years chart* · IYRI +12.4%S&P 500 (SPY) +31.0%
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6582. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+31.55%cumulative total return
#5 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
4 investments have a higher return.
(5 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.0417
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+31.28%cumulative total return
#53 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
52 investments have a higher return.
(53 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.6582
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.0417, 0.6582)≈ 0.6582
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.0417 + 0.6582≈ 0.6999
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
BME places #56 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6582. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For BME, the longer total-return tie-break is +5.6016% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +31.5534% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Healthcare equities with options diversify the sector drivers of income.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6709. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+4.72%cumulative total return
#59 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
58 investments have a higher return.
(59 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6042
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+31.13%cumulative total return
#54 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
53 investments have a higher return.
(54 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.6709
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6042, 0.6709)≈ 0.6709
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6042 + 0.6709≈ 1.2751
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
BKLN places #57 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6709. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For BKLN, the longer total-return tie-break is +5.5767% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +4.7245% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
A senior-loan index portfolio provides a floating-rate credit benchmark.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6835. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+6.53%cumulative total return
#52 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
51 investments have a higher return.
(52 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5313
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+30.91%cumulative total return
#55 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
54 investments have a higher return.
(55 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.6835
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5313, 0.6835)≈ 0.6835
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5313 + 0.6835≈ 1.2148
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
UTF places #58 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6835. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For UTF, the longer total-return tie-break is +5.5416% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +6.5276% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+6.5%
Price-17% of return-1.1%
Dividend117% of return+7.6%
#52 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+30.9%+5.5% / yr annualized
Price-32% of return-9.9%
Dividend132% of return+40.8%
#55 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6962. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+4.98%cumulative total return
#54 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
53 investments have a higher return.
(54 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5521
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+27.19%cumulative total return
#56 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
55 investments have a higher return.
(56 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.6962
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5521, 0.6962)≈ 0.6962
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5521 + 0.6962≈ 1.2483
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
SRLN places #59 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6962. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For SRLN, the longer total-return tie-break is +4.9338% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +4.9811% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6979. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+1.60%cumulative total return
#68 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
67 investments have a higher return.
(68 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6979
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+33.11%cumulative total return
#52 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
51 investments have a higher return.
(52 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.6456
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6979, 0.6456)≈ 0.6979
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6979 + 0.6456≈ 1.3435
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PFFA places #60 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.6979. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PFFA, the longer total-return tie-break is +5.8948% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +1.6041% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN+1.6%
Price-481% of return-7.7%
Dividend581% of return+9.3%
#68 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+33.1%+5.9% / yr annualized
Price-50% of return-16.5%
Dividend150% of return+49.6%
#52 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7083. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+0.92%cumulative total return
#69 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
68 investments have a higher return.
(69 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7083
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+60.01%cumulative total return
#28 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
27 investments have a higher return.
(28 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.3418
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7083, 0.3418)≈ 0.7083
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7083 + 0.3418≈ 1.0501
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
EOI places #61 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7083. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For EOI, the longer total-return tie-break is +9.8706% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +0.9204% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Equity selection and individual-stock calls provide an alternative to index overwriting.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7089. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+4.93%cumulative total return
#55 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
54 investments have a higher return.
(55 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5625
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+27.03%cumulative total return
#57 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
56 investments have a higher return.
(57 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.7089
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5625, 0.7089)≈ 0.7089
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5625 + 0.7089≈ 1.2714
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
JAAA places #62 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7089. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For JAAA, the longer total-return tie-break is +4.9075% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +4.9265% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Senior AAA CLO debt offers a lower-credit-risk comparison to mezzanine CLO funds.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7188. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+0.57%cumulative total return
#70 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
69 investments have a higher return.
(70 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7188
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+84.15%cumulative total return
#16 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
15 investments have a higher return.
(16 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.1899
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7188, 0.1899)≈ 0.7188
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7188 + 0.1899≈ 0.9086
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
HTGC places #63 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7188. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For HTGC, the longer total-return tie-break is +13.0048% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +0.5743% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Venture lending provides a distinct borrower mix with greater technology and life-science exposure.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7215. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+8.84%cumulative total return
#50 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
49 investments have a higher return.
(50 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5104
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+26.86%cumulative total return
#58 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
57 investments have a higher return.
(58 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.7215
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5104, 0.7215)≈ 0.7215
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5104 + 0.7215≈ 1.2319
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
VIGI places #64 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7215. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For VIGI, the longer total-return tie-break is +4.8786% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +8.8382% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
International dividend growers provide a growth-of-income alternative to high current yield.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7292. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+0.41%cumulative total return
#71 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
70 investments have a higher return.
(71 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7292
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+51.48%cumulative total return
#36 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
35 investments have a higher return.
(36 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.4430
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7292, 0.4430)≈ 0.7292
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7292 + 0.4430≈ 1.1722
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
UTG places #65 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7292. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For UTG, the longer total-return tie-break is +8.6706% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +0.4138% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Utility cash flows and active security selection offer a defensive-business income comparison.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7342. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+3.03%cumulative total return
#65 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
64 investments have a higher return.
(65 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6667
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+20.93%cumulative total return
#59 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
58 investments have a higher return.
(59 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.7342
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6667, 0.7342)≈ 0.7342
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6667 + 0.7342≈ 1.4008
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
USHY places #66 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7342. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For USHY, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.8787% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +3.0289% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Broad dollar high-yield exposure diversifies issuers and provides a credit-fund comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7396. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+0.09%cumulative total return
#72 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
71 investments have a higher return.
(72 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7396
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+58.94%cumulative total return
#29 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
28 investments have a higher return.
(29 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.3544
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7396, 0.3544)≈ 0.7396
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7396 + 0.3544≈ 1.0940
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
ARCC places #67 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7396. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For ARCC, the longer total-return tie-break is +9.7221% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +0.0941% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
A broad middle-market lending platform offers a private-credit income comparison.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7468. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+3.60%cumulative total return
#62 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
61 investments have a higher return.
(62 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6354
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+20.66%cumulative total return
#60 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
59 investments have a higher return.
(60 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.7468
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6354, 0.7468)≈ 0.7468
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6354 + 0.7468≈ 1.3823
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
ICSH places #68 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7468. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For ICSH, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.8327% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +3.6022% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
An actively managed short-duration bond sleeve provides a reserve comparison with some credit risk.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7595. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+3.56%cumulative total return
#63 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
62 investments have a higher return.
(63 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6458
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+20.36%cumulative total return
#61 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
60 investments have a higher return.
(61 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.7595
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6458, 0.7595)≈ 0.7595
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6458 + 0.7595≈ 1.4053
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
JPST places #69 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7595. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For JPST, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.7800% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +3.5583% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Short-duration credit provides an income-reserve comparison while accepting modest credit exposure.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7604. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-0.01%cumulative total return
#74 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
73 investments have a higher return.
(74 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7604
02 · Longer period
4.8 years since inception
Oct 28, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+49.95%cumulative total return
#30 of 81 eligible investments on these dates.
29 investments have a higher return.
(30 − 1) ÷ (81 − 1)≈ 0.3625
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7604, 0.3625)≈ 0.7604
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7604 + 0.3625≈ 1.1229
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
BXSL places #70 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7604. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For BXSL, the longer total-return tie-break is +8.6381% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -0.0078% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Senior secured direct lending offers an underwriting and dividend-coverage comparison.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7722. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+3.77%cumulative total return
#60 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
59 investments have a higher return.
(60 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6146
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+20.27%cumulative total return
#62 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
61 investments have a higher return.
(62 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.7722
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6146, 0.7722)≈ 0.7722
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6146 + 0.7722≈ 1.3867
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
SGOV places #71 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7722. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For SGOV, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.7644% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +3.7723% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Short Treasury bills provide an income-producing reserve and opportunity-cost benchmark.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7813. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-1.75%cumulative total return
#76 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
75 investments have a higher return.
(76 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7813
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+39.31%cumulative total return
#43 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
42 investments have a higher return.
(43 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.5316
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7813, 0.5316)≈ 0.7813
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7813 + 0.5316≈ 1.3129
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
GBDC places #72 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7813. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For GBDC, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.8636% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -1.7488% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Senior secured lending provides a comparison of credit quality and underwriting discipline.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7848. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+3.68%cumulative total return
#61 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
60 investments have a higher return.
(61 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6250
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+19.53%cumulative total return
#63 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
62 investments have a higher return.
(63 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.7848
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6250, 0.7848)≈ 0.7848
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6250 + 0.7848≈ 1.4098
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
BIL places #73 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7848. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For BIL, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.6369% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +3.6838% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Short Treasury bills offer a liquid reserve for income investors.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7975. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+2.56%cumulative total return
#67 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
66 investments have a higher return.
(67 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6875
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+18.64%cumulative total return
#64 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
63 investments have a higher return.
(64 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.7975
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6875, 0.7975)≈ 0.7975
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6875 + 0.7975≈ 1.4850
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
HYG places #74 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.7975. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For HYG, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.4820% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +2.5605% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
A diversified high-yield bond ETF provides a liquid credit-income benchmark without CEF premium risk.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8101. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+3.00%cumulative total return
#66 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
65 investments have a higher return.
(66 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.6771
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+18.12%cumulative total return
#65 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
64 investments have a higher return.
(65 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.8101
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.6771, 0.8101)≈ 0.8101
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.6771 + 0.8101≈ 1.4872
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
JNK places #75 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8101. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For JNK, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.3916% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +3.0018% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
High-yield corporate bonds offer cash interest across many issuers.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8228. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+4.76%cumulative total return
#58 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
57 investments have a higher return.
(58 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.5938
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.74%cumulative total return
#66 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
65 investments have a higher return.
(66 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.8228
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.5938, 0.8228)≈ 0.8228
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.5938 + 0.8228≈ 1.4165
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PFXF places #76 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8228. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PFXF, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.1486% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +4.7605% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Non-financial preferred issuers reduce overlap with bank-heavy preferred portfolios.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8229. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-4.12%cumulative total return
#80 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
79 investments have a higher return.
(80 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8229
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+49.26%cumulative total return
#37 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
36 investments have a higher return.
(37 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.4557
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8229, 0.4557)≈ 0.8229
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8229 + 0.4557≈ 1.2786
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
ETY places #77 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8229. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For ETY, the longer total-return tie-break is +8.3506% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -4.1212% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Equity income with an options program offers a diversified managed-distribution comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8438. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-4.84%cumulative total return
#82 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
81 investments have a higher return.
(82 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8438
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+35.18%cumulative total return
#51 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
50 investments have a higher return.
(51 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.6329
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8438, 0.6329)≈ 0.8438
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8438 + 0.6329≈ 1.4767
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
EOS places #78 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8438. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For EOS, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.2221% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -4.8373% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Growth-oriented equities with calls provide an income-and-upside comparison.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8481. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-4.21%cumulative total return
#81 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
80 investments have a higher return.
(81 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8333
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.49%cumulative total return
#68 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
67 investments have a higher return.
(68 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.8481
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8333, 0.8481)≈ 0.8481
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8333 + 0.8481≈ 1.6814
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PG places #79 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8481. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PG, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.1040% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -4.2113% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN-4.2%
Price-6.9%
Dividend+2.7%
Net loss; shares not shown.
#81 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+16.5%+3.1% / yr annualized
Price15% of return+2.4%
Dividend85% of return+14.0%
#68 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8608. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.17%cumulative total return
#35 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
34 investments have a higher return.
(35 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.3542
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+14.84%cumulative total return
#69 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
68 investments have a higher return.
(69 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.8608
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.3542, 0.8608)≈ 0.8608
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.3542 + 0.8608≈ 1.2149
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
RYLD places #80 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8608. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For RYLD, the longer total-return tie-break is +2.8102% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +16.1704% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Small-cap option income diversifies the underlying equity exposure beyond large technology companies.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8861. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
+0.08%cumulative total return
#73 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
72 investments have a higher return.
(73 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7500
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+10.86%cumulative total return
#71 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
70 investments have a higher return.
(71 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.8861
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7500, 0.8861)≈ 0.8861
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7500 + 0.8861≈ 1.6361
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
RQI places #81 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8861. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For RQI, the longer total-return tie-break is +2.0863% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is +0.0835% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
REIT equity and preferred exposure offers an actively managed property-income comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8958. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-7.52%cumulative total return
#87 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
86 investments have a higher return.
(87 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8958
02 · Longer period
3.9 years since inception
Sep 30, 2022 – Sep 18, 2026
+61.00%cumulative total return
#50 of 85 eligible investments on these dates.
49 investments have a higher return.
(50 − 1) ÷ (85 − 1)≈ 0.5833
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8958, 0.5833)≈ 0.8958
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8958 + 0.5833≈ 1.4792
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PBDC places #82 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8958. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PBDC, the longer total-return tie-break is +12.7549% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -7.5194% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN-7.5%
Price-16.7%
Dividend+9.2%
Net loss; shares not shown.
#87 return rank · 97 peers
3.9 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+61.0%Since inception+12.8% / yr annualized
Price16% of return+9.7%
Dividend84% of return+51.3%
#50 return rank · 85 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
3.9 years chart* · PBDC +61.0%S&P 500 (SPY) +124.6%
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8987. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-6.93%cumulative total return
#86 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
85 investments have a higher return.
(86 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8854
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+10.67%cumulative total return
#72 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
71 investments have a higher return.
(72 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.8987
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8854, 0.8987)≈ 0.8987
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8854 + 0.8987≈ 1.7842
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
RNP places #83 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.8987. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For RNP, the longer total-return tie-break is +2.0500% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -6.9296% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
REITs and preferred securities combine two income sources with different economic drivers.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9063. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-8.36%cumulative total return
#88 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
87 investments have a higher return.
(88 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9063
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+104.55%cumulative total return
#5 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
4 investments have a higher return.
(5 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.0506
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9063, 0.0506)≈ 0.9063
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9063 + 0.0506≈ 0.9569
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
MAIN places #84 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9063. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For MAIN, the longer total-return tie-break is +15.4074% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -8.3594% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Debt and equity investments in smaller businesses diversify private-credit income sources.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9114. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-3.86%cumulative total return
#79 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
78 investments have a higher return.
(79 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8125
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+9.66%cumulative total return
#73 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
72 investments have a higher return.
(73 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.9114
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8125, 0.9114)≈ 0.9114
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8125 + 0.9114≈ 1.7239
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PDO places #85 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9114. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PDO, the longer total-return tie-break is +1.8639% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -3.8591% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Flexible credit exposure provides an income comparison across market sectors.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9167. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-8.79%cumulative total return
#89 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
88 investments have a higher return.
(89 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9167
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+35.78%cumulative total return
#49 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
48 investments have a higher return.
(49 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.6076
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9167, 0.6076)≈ 0.9167
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9167 + 0.6076≈ 1.5243
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
OBDC places #86 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9167. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For OBDC, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.3156% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -8.7861% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Direct lending across middle-market borrowers adds a large private-credit platform.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9241. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-1.45%cumulative total return
#75 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
74 investments have a higher return.
(75 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7708
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+3.33%cumulative total return
#74 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
73 investments have a higher return.
(74 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.9241
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7708, 0.9241)≈ 0.9241
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7708 + 0.9241≈ 1.6949
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PFF places #87 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9241. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PFF, the longer total-return tie-break is +0.6573% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -1.4505% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Preferred securities diversify the type of claim generating portfolio income.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9271. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-8.81%cumulative total return
#90 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
89 investments have a higher return.
(90 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9271
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+35.30%cumulative total return
#50 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
49 investments have a higher return.
(50 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.6203
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9271, 0.6203)≈ 0.9271
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9271 + 0.6203≈ 1.5473
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
GLAD places #88 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9271. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For GLAD, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.2413% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -8.8104% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Middle-market credit offers a distinct manager and borrower comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9375. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-12.30%cumulative total return
#91 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
90 investments have a higher return.
(91 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9375
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+2.91%cumulative total return
#75 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
74 investments have a higher return.
(75 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.9367
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9375, 0.9367)≈ 0.9375
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9375 + 0.9367≈ 1.8742
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PTY places #89 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9375. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PTY, the longer total-return tie-break is +0.5764% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -12.3045% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN-12.3%
Price-21.8%
Dividend+9.4%
Net loss; shares not shown.
#91 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+2.9%+0.6% / yr annualized
Price-1352% of return-39.4%
Dividend1452% of return+42.3%
#75 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9479. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-15.05%cumulative total return
#92 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
91 investments have a higher return.
(92 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9479
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+13.34%cumulative total return
#70 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
69 investments have a higher return.
(70 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.8734
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9479, 0.8734)≈ 0.9479
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9479 + 0.8734≈ 1.8213
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PDI places #90 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9479. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PDI, the longer total-return tie-break is +2.5387% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -15.0471% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Multi-sector credit offers multiple income sources, including securitized assets.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9494. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-6.83%cumulative total return
#85 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
84 investments have a higher return.
(85 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8750
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+1.98%cumulative total return
#76 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
75 investments have a higher return.
(76 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.9494
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8750, 0.9494)≈ 0.9494
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8750 + 0.9494≈ 1.8244
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PCN places #91 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9494. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PCN, the longer total-return tie-break is +0.3931% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -6.8275% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Corporate and other credit income adds a long-history manager comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9583. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-15.45%cumulative total return
#93 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
92 investments have a higher return.
(93 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9583
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+16.65%cumulative total return
#67 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
66 investments have a higher return.
(67 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.8354
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9583, 0.8354)≈ 0.9583
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9583 + 0.8354≈ 1.7938
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
MCD places #92 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9583. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For MCD, the longer total-return tie-break is +3.1325% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -15.4463% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN-15.4%
Price-17.6%
Dividend+2.1%
Net loss; shares not shown.
#93 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+16.7%+3.1% / yr annualized
Price23% of return+3.8%
Dividend77% of return+12.8%
#67 return rank · 80 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9620. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-1.94%cumulative total return
#77 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
76 investments have a higher return.
(77 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.7917
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
-2.01%cumulative total return
#77 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
76 investments have a higher return.
(77 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.9620
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.7917, 0.9620)≈ 0.9620
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.7917 + 0.9620≈ 1.7537
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
RFI places #93 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9620. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For RFI, the longer total-return tie-break is -0.4052% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -1.9351% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
A real-estate CEF provides a comparison with leveraged property-income funds.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9688. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-16.03%cumulative total return
#94 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
93 investments have a higher return.
(94 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9688
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+36.89%cumulative total return
#48 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
47 investments have a higher return.
(48 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.5949
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9688, 0.5949)≈ 0.9688
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9688 + 0.5949≈ 1.5637
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
TSLX places #94 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9688. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For TSLX, the longer total-return tie-break is +6.4889% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -16.0257% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Specialty and directly originated lending diversifies the source of BDC cash flows.
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9747. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-3.02%cumulative total return
#78 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
77 investments have a higher return.
(78 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8021
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
-5.19%cumulative total return
#78 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
77 investments have a higher return.
(78 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.9747
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8021, 0.9747)≈ 0.9747
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8021 + 0.9747≈ 1.7768
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PFFD places #95 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9747. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PFFD, the longer total-return tie-break is -1.0625% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -3.0204% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
A broad preferred-security basket offers income diversification beyond covered calls.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9792. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-18.95%cumulative total return
#95 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
94 investments have a higher return.
(95 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9792
02 · Longer period
3.8 years since inception
Nov 14, 2022 – Sep 18, 2026
+87.49%cumulative total return
#17 of 87 eligible investments on these dates.
16 investments have a higher return.
(17 − 1) ÷ (87 − 1)≈ 0.1860
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9792, 0.1860)≈ 0.9792
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9792 + 0.1860≈ 1.1652
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
FSCO places #96 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9792. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For FSCO, the longer total-return tie-break is +17.7639% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -18.9507% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN-19.0%
Price-29.1%
Dividend+10.1%
Net loss; shares not shown.
#95 return rank · 97 peers
3.8 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+87.5%Since inception+17.8% / yr annualized
Price20% of return+17.2%
Dividend80% of return+70.3%
#17 return rank · 87 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
3.8 years chart* · FSCO +87.5%S&P 500 (SPY) +103.0%
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9873. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-5.54%cumulative total return
#83 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
82 investments have a higher return.
(83 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8542
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
-7.08%cumulative total return
#79 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
78 investments have a higher return.
(79 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.9873
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8542, 0.9873)≈ 0.9873
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8542 + 0.9873≈ 1.8415
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PGF places #97 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9873. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PGF, the longer total-return tie-break is -1.4600% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -5.5403% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
Financial-company preferred securities provide a concentrated preferred-income comparison.
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9896. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-29.04%cumulative total return
#96 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
95 investments have a higher return.
(96 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9896
02 · Longer period
1.9 years since inception
Oct 17, 2024 – Sep 18, 2026
+15.58%cumulative total return
#47 of 94 eligible investments on these dates.
46 investments have a higher return.
(47 − 1) ÷ (94 − 1)≈ 0.4946
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.9896, 0.4946)≈ 0.9896
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.9896 + 0.4946≈ 1.4842
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
BTCI places #98 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9896. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For BTCI, the longer total-return tie-break is +7.8342% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -29.0421% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN-29.0%
Price-47.0%
Dividend+17.9%
Net loss; shares not shown.
#96 return rank · 97 peers
1.9 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+15.6%Since inception+7.8% / yr annualized
Price-216% of return-33.6%
Dividend316% of return+49.2%
#47 return rank · 94 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
1.9 years chart* · BTCI +15.6%S&P 500 (SPY) +33.8%
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 1.0000. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-51.21%cumulative total return
#97 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
96 investments have a higher return.
(97 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 1.0000
02 · Longer period
2.5 years since inception
Feb 22, 2024 – Sep 18, 2026
+71.65%cumulative total return
#8 of 91 eligible investments on these dates.
7 investments have a higher return.
(8 − 1) ÷ (91 − 1)≈ 0.0778
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(1.0000, 0.0778)≈ 1.0000
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
1.0000 + 0.0778≈ 1.0778
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
MSTY places #99 of 100
The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 1.0000. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For MSTY, the longer total-return tie-break is +23.3879% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -51.2056% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN-51.2%
Price-79.7%
Dividend+28.4%
Net loss; shares not shown.
#97 return rank · 97 peers
2.5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+71.7%Since inception+23.4% / yr annualized
Price-118% of return-84.4%
Dividend218% of return+156.1%
#8 return rank · 91 peers
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
2.5 years chart* · MSTY +71.7%S&P 500 (SPY) +55.0%
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 1.0000. Lower scores rank first.
See ranking calculation
01 · Recent period
1-year period
Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-6.05%cumulative total return
#84 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.
83 investments have a higher return.
(84 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.8646
02 · Longer period
5-year period
Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
-7.38%cumulative total return
#80 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.
79 investments have a higher return.
(80 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 1.0000
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
03 · First sorting rule
Use the weaker period
max(0.8646, 1.0000)≈ 1.0000
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
04 · If scores tie
Add the two period scores
0.8646 + 1.0000≈ 1.8646
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
PGX places #100 of 100
The longer period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 1.0000. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For PGX, the longer total-return tie-break is -1.5241% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -6.0536% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
Income Lens research candidate
A diversified preferred-security portfolio offers a yield comparison across issuers.
