BackNEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF Overview

NEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF Operating Income

Track NEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF's operating income ($480M) with charts, peers, and YoY trends.

Get informed when a big investor buys or sells

+ Follow

Quarterly Operating Income

$138.37M
24.49% YoY

As of Dec 31, 2017

Annual Operating Income (TTM)

$482.76M
16.53% YoY

Trailing 12 months ending Dec 31, 2017

Average Operating Income (Comparison Companies)

Operating Income History

Operating Income Comparison

Annual Operating Income Growth Rate (%)

Annual Operating Income Growth (Absolute)

NEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF (NIHI) FAQ

NEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF posts a operating income of $480M as of December 2017. That compares with $410M in the prior-year period — up 16.5% year over year. Comparing that reading with peers and prior periods is usually more useful than looking at the number in isolation.

In the prior comparable period, NEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF's operating income was $410M. The latest reading is $480M — a 16.5% year-over-year increase (period ending December 2017). Use the history and growth charts on this page for a longer lookback.

Operating Income is one piece of NEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF's financial statement story. At $480M, it should be interpreted next to related metrics — for example revenue with costs, assets with liabilities, or income with margins. Stockcircle links those related pages so you can move from this number to the surrounding context quickly.

Context for NIHI's operating income usually means three checks: (1) trend versus prior periods, (2) level versus peers, and (3) consistency with growth and profitability. This page covers the first two; NEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF's other metric pages and overview cover the third.

Judging NEOS MSCI EAFE High Income ETF against Finance peers is usually better than using a market-wide rule of thumb. Business models inside Finance are more comparable, which makes gaps in operating income easier to interpret. Start with $480M here, then scan peer and history charts to see if the gap is persistent.