Seeking Alpha has several articles on the exotic GLDI ETN. The most recent described it as "one of the most complicated gold-linked products available to retail investors." [expect high management fees]
Highly complex/wildly variable dividend investments shouldn't be reduced to a simple yield number. Many articles on SA have noted that respected sources can differ wildly on yield. The excellent CEFConnect.com rarely shows the same yields as does Morningstar, or Seeking Alpha, for example. Some sources get their numbers directly from the payer.
I see that quirkiness with the only CEF in my portfolio, Adams Diversified Equity Fund [ADX], which annually pays three quarterly dividends and a year-end one which can swell because it includes its "managed distribution." Not nearly as complicated as GLDI, but I see ADX yield numbers that are all over the place, sometimes with footnotes to add details.
Note this from SA re dividends: "The sum of actual ordinary cash dividend payments in the last 12 months divided by the last close price. Special dividends are not included in the yield. Yield (TTM) is calculated for issuers where dividend payment consistency is low, making Yield (FWD) predictions less reliable."
Where did IHUB's nutty 1,697.86% yield come from? At first I expected there had been an unnoticed change from quarterly pay to monthly pay but that wouldn't explain the huge figure. Have you noticed that IHUB's dividend yield number was likely accurate at 16.98% on: https://ih.advfn.com/stock-market/NASDAQ/credit-suisse-x-links-go-GLDI/financials
That suggests IHUB is getting the yield accurately from their original source and perhaps messing it up in their own page code.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
