PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AMZP vs. SCHG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AMZP vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF (AMZP) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMZP achieves a 8.22% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 7.74% return.


AMZP

1D
-1.91%
1M
-5.00%
YTD
8.22%
6M
7.97%
1Y
23.84%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

SCHG

1D
-0.57%
1M
5.91%
YTD
7.74%
6M
7.31%
1Y
27.05%
3Y*
25.53%
5Y*
16.21%
10Y*
18.92%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMZP vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
AMZP
Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF
8.22%9.56%37.42%7.73%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
7.74%17.50%34.95%10.38%

Correlation

The correlation between AMZP and SCHG is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2023

0.70

The correlation between AMZP and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.70 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AMZP vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

AMZP
AMZP Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
AMZP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AMZP Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
AMZP Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
AMZP Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
AMZP Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AMZP vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF (AMZP) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.


AMZPSCHGDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.83

1.76

-0.93

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.28

2.37

-1.09

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

1.31

-0.15

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.05

1.70

-0.65

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

2.71

5.70

-2.98

AMZP vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMZP Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is lower than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMZP and SCHG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AMZPSCHGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.83

1.76

-0.93

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.73

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.92

0.85

+0.07

Drawdowns

AMZP vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMZP drawdown since its inception was -27.36%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMZP and SCHG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AMZPSCHGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.36%

-34.59%

+7.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.64%

-16.41%

-7.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.65%

-0.57%

-7.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.02%

-5.20%

-0.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.15%

4.90%

+4.25%

Volatility

AMZP vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF (AMZP) has a higher volatility of 8.11% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 3.31%. This indicates that AMZP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AMZPSCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.11%

3.31%

+4.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.00%

11.56%

+10.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.99%

15.45%

+13.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.81%

22.27%

+4.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.81%

21.55%

+5.26%

AMZP vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMZP has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

AMZP vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

AMZP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.00%, more than SCHG's 0.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AMZP
Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF
19.00%22.04%15.15%2.45%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
0.36%0.36%0.39%0.46%0.55%0.42%0.52%0.82%1.27%1.01%1.04%1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


AMZP and SCHG have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AMZP has higher volatility (8.11%) compared to SCHG (3.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMZP dropped -27.36% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 1-year performance, SCHG leads with 27.05% vs 23.84% for AMZP. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 3.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 27.05% return vs 23.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AMZP.

AMZP has the higher dividend yield at 19.00%, compared with 0.36% for SCHG.

AMZP is categorized as Options Trading, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Kurv and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for AMZP and 0.04% for SCHG.

SCHG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 0.83), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AMZP and SCHG

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer