3199.HK vs. SLJY

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

3199.HK (ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF) and SLJY (Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - 3199.HK is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond, while SLJY is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Amplify. 3199.HK is passively managed, while SLJY is actively managed. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. 3199.HK charges 0.62%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for SLJY.

Performance

3199.HK vs. SLJY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a HK$10,000 investment in ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) and Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF (SLJY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

3199.HK is traded in HKD, while SLJY is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the SLJY values have been converted to HKD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3199.HK achieves a 5.99% return, which is significantly higher than SLJY's -1.60% return.

3199.HK

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 1.09%
• YTD: 5.99%
• 6M: 6.91%
• 1Y: 7.82%
• 3Y*: 5.62%
• 5Y*: 2.88%
• 10Y*: 2.92%

SLJY

• 1D: -9.87%
• 1M: -11.31%
• YTD: -1.60%
• 6M: 6.12%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

3199.HK vs. SLJY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
3199.HK ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF	5.99%	2.41%
SLJY Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF	-1.60%	43.10%

Correlation

The correlation between 3199.HK and SLJY is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2025	0.04

Return for Risk

3199.HK vs. SLJY — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

3199.HK

3199.HK Risk / Return Rank: 64
3199.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
3199.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
3199.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 53
3199.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
3199.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 71

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

3199.HK vs. SLJY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) and Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF (SLJY). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	3199.HK	SLJY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.60	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.39	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.10	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	3199.HK	SLJY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.71	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.60	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	1.07	-0.50

Drawdowns

3199.HK vs. SLJY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3199.HK drawdown since its inception was -11.05%, smaller than the maximum SLJY drawdown of -30.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3199.HK and SLJY.

Drawdown Indicators

	3199.HK	SLJY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.05%	-30.51%	+19.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.60%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.84%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.05%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-11.05%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	-28.78%	+28.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.26%	-9.69%	+6.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.63%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	3199.HK	SLJY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.54%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.83%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.06%	50.65%	-45.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.74%	50.65%	-44.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.71%	50.65%	-44.94%

3199.HK vs. SLJY - Expense Ratio Comparison

3199.HK has a 0.62% expense ratio, which is lower than SLJY's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

3199.HK vs. SLJY - Dividend Comparison

3199.HK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.31%, less than SLJY's 18.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
3199.HK ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF	3.31%	3.34%	3.43%	3.51%	3.65%	3.40%	3.29%	3.57%	3.62%	3.39%	3.56%	3.69%
SLJY Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF	18.41%	6.26%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both 3199.HK and SLJY in my portfolio?

3199.HK and SLJY have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, 3199.HK or SLJY?

On fees, 3199.HK is cheaper at 0.62% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, 3199.HK or SLJY?

3199.HK is cheaper with a 0.62% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for SLJY.

What is the main difference between 3199.HK and SLJY?

3199.HK is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while SLJY is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: CSOP and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.62% for 3199.HK and 0.75% for SLJY.