AOTG vs. AIVC

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

AOTG (AOT Growth and Innovation ETF) and AIVC (Amplify Bloomberg AI Value Chain ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. AOTG is actively managed, while AIVC is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, AOTG returned 27.25%/yr vs 44.54%/yr for AIVC. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. AOTG charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for AIVC.

Performance

AOTG vs. AIVC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AOT Growth and Innovation ETF (AOTG) and Amplify Bloomberg AI Value Chain ETF (AIVC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOTG achieves a 15.21% return, which is significantly lower than AIVC's 64.02% return.

AOTG

• 1D: 3.35%
• 1M: 2.27%
• 6M: 23.21%
• YTD: 15.21%
• 1Y: 24.68%
• 3Y*: 27.25%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 26.50%

AIVC

• 1D: 4.53%
• 1M: 4.59%
• 6M: 57.12%
• YTD: 64.02%
• 1Y: 102.13%
• 3Y*: 44.54%
• 5Y*: 16.57%
• 10Y*: 15.61%
• ALL TIME*: 15.83%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
AIVC Amplify Bloomberg AI Value Chain ETF	$719.86K	$1.17M	$2.81M
AOTG AOT Growth and Innovation ETF	$300.71K	$255.35K	$340.89K

AOTG vs. AIVC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
AOTG AOT Growth and Innovation ETF	15.21%	25.26%	32.20%	54.58%	-11.14%
AIVC Amplify Bloomberg AI Value Chain ETF	64.02%	39.94%	18.22%	39.28%	-7.89%

Correlation

The correlation between AOTG and AIVC is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 29, 2022	0.83

The correlation between AOTG and AIVC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

AOTG vs. AIVC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AOTG	AIVC
Technology	69.1%	91.0%
Communication Services	13.4%	2.1%
Financial Services	10.1%	0.0%
Consumer Cyclical	6.6%	5.0%
Industrials	0.6%	1.7%
Healthcare	0.2%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AOTG vs. AIVC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

AOTG

AOTG Risk / Return Rank: 31
AOTG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
AOTG Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
AOTG Omega Ratio Rank: 32
AOTG Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
AOTG Martin Ratio Rank: 30

AIVC

AIVC Risk / Return Rank: 90
AIVC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
AIVC Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
AIVC Omega Ratio Rank: 87
AIVC Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
AIVC Martin Ratio Rank: 89

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

AOTG vs. AIVC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AOT Growth and Innovation ETF (AOTG) and Amplify Bloomberg AI Value Chain ETF (AIVC). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AOTG	AIVC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.90	2.90	-2.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.35	3.26	-1.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.41	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.08	4.41	-3.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.94	15.43	-12.49

AOTG vs. AIVC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOTG Sharpe Ratio is 0.90, which is lower than the AIVC Sharpe Ratio of 2.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOTG and AIVC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AOTG vs. AIVC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOTG drawdown since its inception was -31.63%, smaller than the maximum AIVC drawdown of -56.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOTG and AIVC.

Drawdown Indicators

	AOTG	AIVC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.63%	-56.11%	+24.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.85%	-23.29%	+0.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.41%	-32.55%	+5.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-53.58%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-56.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.60%	-9.81%	+6.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.83%	-16.35%	+8.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.40%	6.64%	+1.76%

Volatility

AOTG vs. AIVC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AOT Growth and Innovation ETF (AOTG) is 10.71%, while Amplify Bloomberg AI Value Chain ETF (AIVC) has a volatility of 14.00%. This indicates that AOTG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AIVC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AOTG	AIVC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.71%	14.00%	-3.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.50%	30.18%	-6.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.79%	35.46%	-7.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.71%	31.46%	-1.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.71%	27.56%	+2.15%

AOTG vs. AIVC - Expense Ratio Comparison

AOTG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than AIVC's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

AOTG vs. AIVC - Dividend Comparison

AOTG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AIVC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.10%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
AIVC Amplify Bloomberg AI Value Chain ETF	0.10%	0.17%	0.21%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.39%	1.16%	0.38%	0.92%	0.64%
AOTG AOT Growth and Innovation ETF	0.00%	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 AOTG and AIVC in my portfolio?

AOTG and AIVC have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AOTG or AIVC?

AIVC has higher volatility (14.00%) compared to AOTG (10.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOTG dropped -31.63% vs AIVC's -56.11%.

Which ETF is better, AOTG or AIVC?

On 3-year performance, AIVC leads with 44.54% vs 27.25% for AOTG. On fees, AIVC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, AOTG has been the lower-risk option at 10.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AOTG or AIVC?

Over the 3-year period, AIVC has performed better with a 44.54% return vs 27.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AOTG or AIVC?

AIVC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for AOTG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AOTG or AIVC?

AIVC has the higher dividend yield at 0.10%, compared with 0.00% for AOTG.

What is the main difference between AOTG and AIVC?

They also come from different issuers: AOT and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for AOTG and 0.59% for AIVC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AIVC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.90 vs 0.90), 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.