update:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1924868/000199937124009713/clia_497-080724.htm
97 1 clia_497-080724.htm SUPPLEMENT
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration Nos. 333-264478; 811-23793
Veridien Climate Action ETF (CLIA)
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated August 7, 2024
to the Summary Prospectus dated November 27, 2023, and to each of the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) dated April 21, 2023
This Supplement replaces and restates the supplement that was filed on August 5, 2024.
Tidal Investments LLC (“Tidal”), the Fund’s investment adviser, informed the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Tidal Trust II of its view that the Fund could not conduct its business and operations in an economically efficient manner over the long term due to the Fund’s inability to attract sufficient investment assets to maintain a competitive operating structure, and recommended the Fund’s closure and liquidation to the Board. The Board determined, after considering Tidal’s recommendation, that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders to liquidate and terminate the Fund as described below.
In addition, the Chief Investment Officer of the Fund’s sub-adviser, Veridien Global Investors LLC (the “Sub-Adviser”), who was also one of the Fund’s portfolio managers, recently resigned from employment with the Sub-Adviser. In light of her resignation, the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser have determined that the Fund’s portfolio could not be effectively managed in accordance with the Fund’s registration statement and, therefore, the Fund’s investment portfolio has been liquidated and transitioned to cash. As a result of these circumstances the Adviser and Sub-Adviser have determined that the liquidation of the Fund is advisable and in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders.
Resignation of Portfolio Manager
Effective August 2, 2024, Ariane Mahler has resigned from her position as Chief Investment Officer of the Sub-Adviser. Ms. Mahler was also a portfolio manager to the Fund. As such, all references to Ms. Mahler are removed throughout the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus, and SAI.
Liquidation
In preparation for the liquidation, shares of the Fund will cease trading on the NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE”) and will be closed to purchase by investors as of the close of regular trading on the NYSE on August 16, 2024 (the “Closing Date”). The Fund will not accept purchase orders after the Closing Date.
Shareholders may sell their holdings in the Fund prior to the Closing Date and customary brokerage charges may apply to these transactions. However, from August 16, 2024 through August 20, 2024 (the “Liquidation Date”), shareholders may be able to sell their shares only to certain broker-dealers and there is no assurance that there will be a market for the Fund’s shares during this time period. Between the Closing Date and the Liquidation Date, the Fund will be in the process of closing down and liquidating the Fund’s portfolio. This process will result in the Fund increasing its cash holdings and, as a consequence, not tracking its underlying index, which is inconsistent with the Fund’s investment objective and strategy.
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration Nos. 333-264478; 811-23793
On or about the Liquidation Date, the Fund will liquidate its assets and distribute cash pro rata to all shareholders of record who have not previously redeemed or sold their shares, subject to any required withholding. Liquidation proceeds paid to shareholders generally should be treated as received in exchange for shares and will therefore be treated as a taxable event giving rise to a capital gain or loss depending on a shareholder’s tax basis. Shareholders should contact their tax adviser to discuss the income tax consequences of the liquidation. In addition, these payments to shareholders may include distributions of accrued capital gains and dividends. As calculated on the Liquidation Date, the Fund’s net asset value will reflect the costs of closing the Fund. Once the distributions are complete, the Fund will terminate.
* * * * *
For more information, please contact the Fund at (888) 318-0133.
Please retain this Supplement with your Summary Prospectus, Prospectus, and SAI.

Yesterday I put on a 5-strike combo spread on ALT expiring in Jan 26 as a totally speculatitive play for potential gains should their GLP-1 competitor keep showing good promise and/or if a big pharma player decides to take them out. Downside risk $5000, unlimited upside if it happens, so it's a viable risk/reward for this kind of trade. (for speculative trades, I hope for the best, but would be happy with getting out at 'breakeven' if necessary.)

Well, covered calls don't have downside protections unless puts are also bought. But that will cut into the income/premium from calls.
There are also funds with collars but their goal seems to be to just beat the money-market funds.

The only times I might collar a position is when it is nicely profitable (and usually only for a credit or tiny debit) simply to protect the gains .... but sometimes the numbers work out right and I can start a new position and put on a decent collar for a credit, which is the best-case scenario. Most times I will collar income-producing securities that are boring and generally not too volatile.
Basic covered call writing can goose one's returns, sure -- but as YBB says, you don't get much downside protection on that alone.

Thanks @BenWP
I wonder how the anverage retail investor today would react if his “go-anywhere” fund lost 15% in a year when the Dow, NASDAQ and S&P all gained? Obviously the manager had decided to go somewhere non-mainstream. May have been wrong. May have been a year or two early. Might have built a large position in something while price was depressed.
Real hedge funds operate a lot differently than retail funds. They attract wealthy clients who can ride out multi-year losses. They impose limits on how much, if any, they can withdraw for the first several years. And often the operator receives a predetermined % of the gains - adding incentives to take risk. SEC restrictions may be lesser or non-existent. More risk taking. Much different animal.

@Baseball_Fan
As to my post and the statement:

Trump blames Harris for markets downturn.
“Stock markets are crashing, job numbers are terrible, we're heading towards World War III, and we have two of the most incompetent "leaders" in history. This is not good!,” Trump posted in capital letters.

I do not separate an individual(s) from making such an inflammatory statement; be they a large bank CEO, the head of a brokerage firm, a person of prominence related to the investing world, or any other prominent person in the U.S.
Any and all such statements that might affect my investments are worthy of comment.
The person and statement noted happens to be a politician.
Any direct political oriented opinions should exist in the 'Off Topic' section of this forum.

If you choose to walk to the door of the article link, be careful where you step; as there are a lot of loose screws on the floor!
Trump blames Harris for markets downturn.

“Stock markets are crashing, job numbers are terrible, we're heading towards World War III, and we have two of the most incompetent "leaders" in history. This is not good!,” Trump posted in capital letters.

Story, if you're interested in the whole spew.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1924868/000199937124009530/clia-497_080524.htm
497 1 clia-497_080524.htm SUPPLEMENT DATED AUGUST 5, 2024
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration Nos. 333-264478; 811-23793
Veridien Climate Action ETF (CLIA)
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated August 5, 2024
to the Summary Prospectus dated November 27, 2023, and to each of the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) dated April 21, 2023, Tidal Investments LLC (“Tidal”), the Fund’s investment adviser, informed the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Tidal Trust II of its view that the Fund could not conduct its business and operations in an economically efficient manner over the long term due to the Fund’s inability to attract sufficient investment assets to maintain a competitive operating structure, and recommended the Fund’s closure and liquidation to the Board. The Board determined, after considering Tidal’s recommendation, that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders to liquidate and terminate the Fund as described below.
In addition, the Fund’s sub-adviser, Veridien Global Investors LLC (the “Sub-Adviser”), is experiencing financial difficulties, which has led to the resignation of the Sub-Adviser’s Chief Investment Officer, who was one of the Fund’s portfolio managers. In light of her resignation, the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser have determined that the Fund’s portfolio could not be effectively managed in accordance with the Fund’s registration statement and, therefore, the Fund’s investment portfolio has been liquidated and transitioned to cash. As a result of these circumstances the Adviser and Sub-Adviser have determined that the liquidation of the Fund is advisable and in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders.
Resignation of Portfolio Manager
Effective August 2, 2024, Ariane Mahler has resigned from her position as Chief Investment Officer of the Sub-Adviser. Ms. Mahler was also a portfolio manager to the Fund. As such, all references to Ms. Mahler are removed throughout the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus, and SAI.
Liquidation
In preparation for the liquidation, shares of the Fund will cease trading on the NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE”) and will be closed to purchase by investors as of the close of regular trading on the NYSE on August 16, 2024 (the “Closing Date”). The Fund will not accept purchase orders after the Closing Date.
Shareholders may sell their holdings in the Fund prior to the Closing Date and customary brokerage charges may apply to these transactions. However, from August 16, 2024 through August 20, 2024 (the “Liquidation Date”), shareholders may be able to sell their shares only to certain broker-dealers and there is no assurance that there will be a market for the Fund’s shares during this time period. Between the Closing Date and the Liquidation Date, the Fund will be in the process of closing down and liquidating the Fund’s portfolio. This process will result in the Fund increasing its cash holdings and, as a consequence, not tracking its underlying index, which is inconsistent with the Fund’s investment objective and strategy.
On or about the Liquidation Date, the Fund will liquidate its assets and distribute cash pro rata to all shareholders of record who have not previously redeemed or sold their shares, subject to any required withholding. Liquidation proceeds paid to shareholders generally should be treated as received in exchange for shares and will therefore be treated as a taxable event giving rise to a capital gain or loss depending on a shareholder’s tax basis. Shareholders should contact their tax adviser to discuss the income tax consequences of the liquidation. In addition, these payments to shareholders may include distributions of accrued capital gains and dividends. As calculated on the Liquidation Date, the Fund’s net asset value will reflect the costs of closing the Fund. Once the distributions are complete, the Fund will terminate.
* * * * *
For more information, please contact the Fund at (888) 318-0133.
Please retain this Supplement with your Summary Prospectus, Prospectus, and SAI.

@MikeW et al
I agree with Junkster, at this time, regarding quality bond funds or etf's; being US Treasury and/or corporate bonds.
There are too many pieces of very dry wood, that are placed too close to a small burning fire. The fire and wood being: Israel and Iran, etc.; the most important U.S. elections of our lifetimes and F-16 fighters started to arrive today in Ukraine; shortly after Ukraine had announced the sinking of a Russian submarine and other important attacks. In addition, is what actions the FED may take in the coming months based on their data views.
We're a Medicare/SS household, and while we enjoy having decent annual returns; we also have capital preservation in mind.
Most of us spend $1,000's each and every year for house and auto insurance, and never file a claim; and the money is gone forever.
We treat our bond fund holdings as 'investment insurance' currently using BAGIX (active managed). We'll not likely outrun inflation and taxes, but maintain the capital.
The AGG bond etf is similar in high quality to BAGIX (ER = .30).
I've watched over the years and charted these two against bond 'index' funds. BAGIX has maintained near 1% annualized above the returns of the other two. AGG and bond index funds run very close paths. I'm not trying to sell, but to offer the view.
Our portfolio is 40/60. The 40 in equity is split between growth and conservative equity (healthcare). The 60 is bond/MMKT. The entire portfolio arrived at a +.33% for last week.
One can always dollar cost average into whatever.
NOTE: We've remained fully U.S. centered with investments since 2008. We have more than enough foreign exposure inside the equities, from their foreign earnings.
Lastly, we don't know what the 'shake out' events will be or from where.
Good evening.

Per A Wealth of Common Sense....with my bold for emphasis:
https://awealthofcommonsense.com/2024/08/this-is-normal-2/
"The S&P 500 has finished the year up double-digits in 56 out of 96 years since 1928 (almost 60% of the time). In 24 of those 56 years with double-digit gains, there was a double-digit loss at some point in the same year. That means nearly 45% of the time when the stock market has been up 10% or more, there has been a correction of 10% or worse on the path to those gains."

Analysts await key services sector metric to gauge US vulnerability to recession as stocks in Middle East fall amid regional tension
Following are edited excerpts from a current report in The Guardian:

Global investors are bracing for further turmoil, after fears that the powerhouse US economy could be drifting towards recession sent stock markets tumbling at the end of last week. Investors in Europe, Asia and New York were spooked by US data that include worse-than-expected job numbers on Thursday, prompting concern that the world’s largest economy is in worse shape than previously thought.
The data, coupled with disappointing results from tech firms Amazon, Alphabet and Intel, led to share sell-offs at the end of last week, while Middle Eastern stocks also fell on Sunday amid persistent tension in the region. Analysts fear that any further signs of fragility in large economies could herald fresh volatility. A slowdown in Germany last month prompted analysts to warn of a recession, while a rise in interest rates by Japan’s central bank sent shares on the Nikkei index down 2,216 points, or nearly 6%, on Friday.
In the last month, the prospect of a recession in some of the world’s biggest economies has sent the cost of a barrel of Brent crude falling from almost $88 to below $78.
Closely watched economic data due this week in the US includes figures for the services sector on Monday and the unemployment claimant count on Thursday. Elsewhere, the UK is among several big economies, including China and Japan, to release service sector data on Monday.
Markets got the jitters last week after US jobs data for July showed a worse-than-expected slowdown, with 114,000 jobs created rather than the predicted 175,000. The unemployment rate increased to a three-year high of 4.3%, while US manufacturing activity also slumped, falling to an eight-month low in July as new orders tailed off.
The figures stoked anxiety that the world’s largest economy is vulnerable to a recession and may need to cut rates faster than expected to spur demand, rather than unwinding them in a more orderly fashion. So far this year, investors have grown accustomed to cooling inflation and gradually slowing employment, which appeared to be setting the scene for the Fed to begin trimming interest rates gradually.
That optimism had driven big gains in stocks: the S&P 500 is up by 12% this year, despite recent losses, while the tech-focused Nasdaq has gained nearly 12%.
But on Friday, the Nasdaq lost 2.4% to finish in correction territory – 10% off its record high, while Japanese equities recorded their worst day since the Covid-19 pandemic, with the Nikkei 225 index down 5.8%. In London, the FTSE100 blue-chip share index lost more than 120 points at one stage, down by 1.5%. Europe’s main stock indices also declined on Friday, with European technology stocks falling to their lowest level in more than six months. France’s CAC 40 hit its lowest level since last November, down more than 1%, while Germany’s DAX lost 2%.
In the US, Uber, Airbnb, Hilton International and Coca-Cola are among the big firms posting financial results this week. European bellwether stocks such as the Italian insurer Generali and Deutsche Telekom, will also report this week.
While shares slid, gold hit a new record on Friday as investors flocked to safe-haven assets. The US dollar weakened, lifting the pound by 0.5% to $1.28, and the euro by 1.2% to $1.092.

Investors expect their companies to increase profits every quarter; customers expect them to continually lose money. Neither expectation is realistic.
Zooming out only slightly:

A 2023 pretax underwriting profit of $3.6 billion, reversing a $1.9 billion underwriting loss reported for 2022 at Berkshire’s personal auto insurance operation, GEICO,

https://www.carriermanagement.com/news/2024/02/25/259036.htm
You can find us the figures for 2021 and 2020.
Geico's ability to charge higher premiums even as drivers submitted fewer claims.
Insurers play the long game. If they knew in advance each year how much they would have to pay out, they would set premiums precisely and never have a losing year. But see below (my final few paragraphs quoting NYT).

Like the rest of the auto-insurance industry, Geico was hit by sharply higher claims costs in 2022. It responded by raising premiums, which were up an average of 17% per policy in 2023. That increase, plus sharp cuts in expenses, including for advertising, helped restore profitability in 2023.

https://www.barrons.com/articles/berkshire-hathaway-geico-progressive-stocks-c03bcdf4
make Geico more efficient.
That's one way of putting it. Another would be: make Geico less inefficient. Again from that Barron's article:

The head of Berkshire’s insurance business, Ajit Jain, acknowledged the challenges at the conglomerate’s annual meeting last May [2023], saying “Geico’s technology needs a lot more work than I thought it did.” He noted that Geico had “more than 600 legacy systems that don’t really talk to each other.” Geico, he added, is trying to compress that to no more than 15 or 16 systems.
The underinvestment in technology that led to that tangle looks like an unusual unforced error by Buffett. He didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Geico declined to comment.

In the recent 2024 annual meeting (short video clip below), Jain acknowledged that Geico is still playing catchup. Let's hope it continues to improve and that Salim Ramji over at Vanguard can take away some lessons from this. And speaking of Vanguard, Buffett also mentioned Geico's low cost advantage that "masked" Geico's inefficiencies.

As to why the whole industry is raising rates quickly and why there are these wild swings in profits (losses), the NYTimes recently wrote in Why Is Car Insurance So Expensive?:

A key reason car insurance costs are rising so fast right now has to do with how the industry is regulated. ...
If insurers are deemed to profit too heavily, regulators can make them return money to customers. ... At the height of pandemic lockdowns in 2020, when many cars sat idle, insurers returned almost $13 billion to customers through dividends, refund checks and premium reductions for policy renewals ...
When the pandemic shut down most economic activity, it messed up insurers’ ability to use the past to predict the future. ...
[I]n the second half of 2021 ... The prices of cars and parts were jumping and drivers were back on the roads and crashing left and right after a hiatus behind the wheel. "You went from this period of incredible profitability to incredible losses in the blink of an eye," ... “Everyone was together in significantly pushing for rate increases.” ...
[California's insurance] regulator did not start approving insurers’ requests to raise rates until near the end of 2022. The backlog grew so large that the average wait time for approvals was longer — by several months — than the six-month policies that insurers wanted to sell.
[Calif. was slowest but other states also very slow]
In 2021, insurers’ personal auto businesses started recording losses. [2021: $4B, 2022: $33B, 2023: $17B] ... many companies still need to raise prices to make up for those bad years.

Do you guys remember Todd Combs? He is the CEO of Geico. He was originally hired by Buffett in 2010 to manage some of BRK portfolio investments, with the thought that he would take over BRK investments when Buffett retires. It turned out Todd had worked during his younger years at Progressive and some other insurance company as an analyst and had good knowledge of GEICO's line of business. So, Buffett made him CEO of Geico in 2020 to make Geico more efficient. I guess he is doing his job! It is interesting how Buffett seems to have a knack to identify human talent just as he is good at spotting good companies.
It will be interesting to see how Geico investment portfolio has done since Todd took over.

Some random thoughts -
XLU was up 4.3% for the week which makes no sense if the economy is falling out of bed. At the end of October, 10 yr was at 4.9% and ended at 3.8% on 12/26. During that drastic drop in 10 yr rates, XLU did not rise or behave as well as it has done in the past 2 months when 10 yr rates dropped from a much, much lower level. XLU, as a staple necessity, not losing would make sense but gain so strongly if the economy is going to fall out of bed? I am not sure.
I am guessing its recent behavior is just a reflection of moderating inflation expectations and consequential interest rates but not a signal about the economy. I am not sure inflation goes back to pre-Covid era without change in people's attitudes. Also, there is that onshoring related inflation but I will believe onshoring when I see it in size (outside the Chip sector). I am expecting deficits will come down as tax rates increase - sort of why Buffett is booking gains in Apple stock at the current lower rates. So, the inflation related to Govt spending likely comes down but that related to people's attitudes may not, unless there is pressure on wages. Only if we could make that hallucinating generative AI to work!
What will happen to 10 yr rates and wages if services come strong next week and the next employment report comes stronger than the last one?
Jackson Hole is not for another three weeks. Please post if you know when J Powel speaks before Jackson Hole.

I’ve dug up one more from Barron’s EKBAX
“This Go Anywhere Fund Beats 99% of its Peers” (I am a subscriber. Likely the link won’t help you much.)
Barron’s
Excerpt: “The lead manager of Allspring Diversified Capital Builder (ticker: EKBAX) invests in everything from high-quality blue chips like Alphabet (GOOGL) and small industrial stocks like Timken (TKR) to Treasury, high-yield, and convertible bonds.”
See @msf’s link below.
In the meantime … This linked story credits Blackrock with creating a “Go Anywhere” fund for star manager Rick Rieder to run. Take it with a grain of salt.

Warren Buffett’s firm increased its cash reserves to $227bn, sparking concerns about company’s view of US economy
Following are excerpts from a current report in The Guardian:

Warren Buffett appears to have soured on stocks, letting cash soar at his Berkshire Hathaway firm to nearly $277bn and selling a large chunk of its stake in Apple, even as the conglomerate posted a record quarterly operating profit.
Berkshire sold about 390m Apple shares in the second quarter, on top of 115m shares from January to March, as Apple’s stock price rose 23%. It still owned about 400m shares worth $84.2bn as of 30 June.
The cash stake grew to $276.9bn from $189bn three months earlier largely because Berkshire sold a net $75.5bn of stocks. It was the seventh straight quarter Berkshire sold more stocks than it bought.
Second-quarter profits from Berkshire’s dozens of businesses rose 15% to $11.6bn, or about $8,073 per class A share, from $10.04bn a year earlier.
Nearly half of that profit came from underwriting and investments in Berkshire’s insurance businesses.

Personal observation:
Would these be the same insurance companies that claim they are losing money?

Berkshire often lets cash build up when it can’t find whole businesses or individual stocks to buy at fair prices. Its cash may also signal concerns about the broader US economy – many investors view Berkshire as a proxy for it.
Government data on Friday that showed slowing job growth and the highest unemployment rate since October 2021 prompted some analysts to project multiple Federal Reserve rate cuts starting in September.
But Berkshire’s returns from short-term treasuries should decline once rate cuts begin.
“We’d love to spend it, but we won’t spend it unless we think we’re doing something that has very little risk and can make us a lot of money,” Buffett said at Berkshire’s 4 May annual meeting, referring to Berkshire’s cash.
Since mid-July, Berkshire has also sold more than $3.8bn in shares in Bank of America, its second-largest stock holding.
Buffett remains a big Apple fan, reflecting the iPhone maker’s strong pricing power and committed customer base.
He said at the meeting that he expected Apple to remain Berkshire’s largest stock investment, but selling made sense because the 21% federal tax rate on the gains would probably grow.

Note: Text emphasis added in above.

- Try DRRAX (Rated neutral by Morningstar) 10 YR Return +3.4% Mentioned in Barron’s favorably in 2020 as a “go anywhere” fund. But I am unable to pull up the article.
- Also try QAI (Hedge fund tracker etf) 10 YR Return 1.8% (Not Rated at Morningstar).
Personally I probably wouldn’t buy such a fund. Hedge funds have the advantage of being able to lock-up an investor’s assets for a set number of years. Allows higher level of risk taking. Mutual funds do not have that advantage. Lose 10% in a year and $$ rushes out the door.
- One (approximation) I’ve owned for short periods in the past (without fully comprehending) is the CEF GUG.
I’d term it “Go anywhere with an emphasis on fixed income”. Quite volatile as CEFs tend to be.
- BCAT (CEF) managed by Rick Rieder might fit your bill. I bailed after it jumped 10 or 15% a year or so ago. Heights bother me. Rieder has a lot of discretion in what to buy.
- You might look at GAA. Globally diversified fund of funds. Risk averse high (media) profile manager some would rather avoid. Spreads the risk around. Seems to have a lot of personal discretion which Morningstar loathes. Exposure to gold / EM. But not billed as “go anywhere.” Morningstar Neutral Rating. 5 YR +5.64% (Disclosure: I own this one.)
-

I have a highly diversified stable of investments/income producing vehicles. More bearish lately and have been taking profits/building cash (and cash like) investments. My question…
I’m looking for a fund that goes anywhere/does anything to produce gains. It has the discretion to do that and does it. A hedge fund like mutual fund. Think Oceanstone or CGM Focus. I’m not concerned about risk just something that I can slowly build a position in, in the next 3-4 years. I was really interested in MRFOX but the hoops I would have to jump through to buy and sell are too much. Signature guarantees to sell a large amount? No thanks.
Any suggestions where I should be looking? Thank you.

Without going into too many details, here are some broad comments:
This is marketed as a reduced risk investment. Prospectus:

The Fund may also hold a substantial portion of its assets in cash or cash equivalents, including treasury bills and money market funds in an effort to maintain high liquidity and to provide additional downside protection by limiting the Fund's exposure to equity market risk. The Fund is designed to generate income while providing some downside protection in the event of broad equity market downturns and also providing some equity market upside participation exposure to the Index.
...
The portfolio managers seek to construct the options-based income component of the Fund’s portfolio by investing in high-income, short-term ELNs with a focus on downside protection.

Derivatives, including ELNs, can be used to reduce volatility. Though as implied at the end of the first paragraph above this comes at a cost of limiting upside potential.
That's to be expected - just as higher risk should bring higher rewards, lower risk is expected to bring lower rewards.
The derivative risk here may still be consequential. While Vanguard is curiously comfortable with trading this ETF, Fidelity requires investors to agree to the following:

Fidelity has designated certain investment products identified as more complex and/or higher risk as “Designated Investments”. I understand that from time to time Fidelity may accept orders for Designated Investments only from self-directed, sophisticated, experienced investors who (1) have represented to Fidelity that they do their own investment research and analysis and (2) agree not to rely to any extent upon Fidelity for advice, guidance, information, direction or recommendations relating to these investments.

Please don't rely on any guidance, information, direction or recommendation received here, either :-)
Personally, I'm comfortable with the concept of ELNs, principal protected notes, etc. ISTM the key risk (aside from market risk) is counterparty risk (will the issuer default?). The other significant factor is the packaging cost. The issuer is packaging securities and options into a single product (note) for a fee (skimming returns).
A risk in this ETF is that it is a black box. They say they are using ELNs in an "options-based income strategy". You're trusting them here. How good is that strategy? How well do they execute it?
At least here you've got a bit of info to go on. The portfolio managers, Burrello, Devine, and Huxon are co- (not lead-) managers of another Invesco fund using the same strategy albeit in a different universe.
GTNDX also uses a "portfolio of equity securities and equity-linked notes designed to generate high income while providing some downside protection." Summary prospectus. The differences are not in the strategy but in the equity portfolio. This is a global portfolio, not a domestic one, and it is actively managed, not an index. Still, it can offer some clues into how well these managers execute the stated strategy.
Its annual report tells the story of what one gives up for reduced volatility.

The Fund’s underperformance over the year [2023] was largely driven by the sub-portfolio of customized ELNs that reduced overall returns relative to the MSCI All Country World ex USA Index as equity markets rallied through much of the year; however, the defensiveness also helped reduce volatility and downside impact to performance during the more volatile periods throughout the year. In addition, the strategy delivered a higher yield relative to the dividend yield of the MSCI All Country World ex USA Index.

I brought up GTNDX because it is one of the highest yielding derivative income funds, and it still only yielded 8% last year (with a 13% total return). (Disregard the 1* rating for GTNDX; that's likely because it's being compared to domestic funds in the same category.)
Domestic stocks typically have lower yields than foreign stocks, so it's an even harder task to reach 9% with a domestic portfolio. Invesco has a domestic fund SCAUX (actively managed) with the same team as GTNDX. In 2023 it (like domestic funds generally) outperformed the sibling global fund, but yielded in the 6% range.
Based on the above, 9% target for RSPA seems more aspirational than realistic. Designed to attract investors, not necessarily to be achieved.
If it's cash flow you're looking for, there are substantially unleveraged CEFs that can get you this yield. True, they return some principal, but that's usually just a transmutation of unrealized gains into distributions. You're not losing your original principal (though the unrealized gain portion of the total principal is being tapped). The industry has come up with an enticing name for this: constructive return of capital.
For example, ETB. Tends to trade at a discount. Based on price, it yields over 9%, all domestic, no leverage. 150+ stocks. Just tossing this out, I haven't researched.
https://www.cefconnect.com/closed-end-funds-screener
Then there is the question of why track an equal-weighted S&P 500 index? John Rekenthaler found that between 1998 and early 2023 " the equally weighted S&P 500 portfolio has thrashed the conventional index." (50% greater value.) But that was then, this is now. As he also wrote, "I cannot prophesy that its success will continue." It didn't.
VFIAX has crushed VADDX over the past YTD, 1year, 5 year, and 10 year. It has also beaten VADDX over the latter's lifetime (since 1997).

PSH YTD TR: -0.4% and currently at 34% discount. Which institutional investor would be able to get this product through their investment committee?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-02/ackman-s-pershing-lost-4-7-in-july-erasing-most-of-2024-gains

An interval fund could work for institutional investors.
He could have started with a 5-year term CEF with an opportunity to extend the term with shareholder vote, which is a more captive capital than an interval fund.
My advice to him now is "Cool it." Come back next year.