BATT vs. MOO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

BATT (Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF) and MOO (VanEck Agribusiness ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BATT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Amplify, while MOO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Agribusiness Index. BATT is actively managed, while MOO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BATT returned 1.94%/yr vs -0.93%/yr for MOO. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BATT charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for MOO.

Performance

BATT vs. MOO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BATT achieves a 19.49% return, which is significantly higher than MOO's 7.97% return.

BATT

• 1D: 3.19%
• 1M: -6.31%
• YTD: 19.49%
• 6M: 21.87%
• 1Y: 88.06%
• 3Y*: 10.63%
• 5Y*: 1.94%
• 10Y*: —

MOO

• 1D: 0.85%
• 1M: -4.12%
• YTD: 7.97%
• 6M: 8.15%
• 1Y: 8.56%
• 3Y*: 1.51%
• 5Y*: -0.93%
• 10Y*: 7.09%

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

BATT vs. MOO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	19.49%	59.70%	-13.93%	-7.05%	-32.25%	16.52%	44.43%	-2.40%	-42.27%
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	7.97%	15.61%	-12.43%	-8.57%	-8.10%	23.99%	14.59%	22.29%	-8.06%

Correlation

The correlation between BATT and MOO is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2018	0.63

Over the past year, the correlation between BATT and MOO has dropped to 0.38 - well below their long-term average of 0.63, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

BATT vs. MOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BATT	MOO
Basic Materials	57.0%	25.5%
Consumer Cyclical	18.9%	-
Industrials	16.9%	20.9%
Technology	5.6%	-
Communication Services	0.0%	-
Financial Services	0.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	-	36.8%
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	16.8%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BATT vs. MOO — Risk / Return Rank

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

BATT

BATT Risk / Return Rank: 86
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 80
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 88

MOO

MOO Risk / Return Rank: 21
MOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Omega Ratio Rank: 20
MOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

BATT vs. MOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO). 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.

	BATT	MOO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	0.64	+2.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.04	1.00	+2.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.12	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.03	0.87	+4.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.97	2.42	+14.55

BATT vs. MOO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BATT Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is higher than the MOO Sharpe Ratio of 0.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BATT and MOO, 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

BATT vs. MOO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BATT drawdown since its inception was -69.38%, roughly equal to the maximum MOO drawdown of -69.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BATT and MOO.

Drawdown Indicators

	BATT	MOO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-69.38%	-69.53%	+0.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.03%	-10.38%	-6.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-47.65%	-26.83%	-20.82%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-61.98%	-39.52%	-22.46%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.52%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.54%	-19.10%	+10.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-34.68%	-16.97%	-17.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.04%	3.70%	+1.34%

Volatility

BATT vs. MOO - Volatility Comparison

Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) has a higher volatility of 13.45% compared to VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) at 3.50%. This indicates that BATT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BATT	MOO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.45%	3.50%	+9.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.58%	10.85%	+15.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.35%	14.16%	+18.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.87%	17.15%	+12.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.74%	18.19%	+12.55%

BATT vs. MOO - Expense Ratio Comparison

BATT has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than MOO's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

BATT vs. MOO - Dividend Comparison

BATT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, less than MOO's 2.29% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	1.55%	1.85%	3.17%	3.23%	4.14%	2.32%	0.21%	3.22%	0.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	2.29%	2.47%	3.41%	2.93%	2.15%	1.17%	1.10%	1.26%	1.69%	1.44%	2.14%	2.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BATT and MOO in my portfolio?

BATT and MOO have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BATT or MOO?

BATT has higher volatility (13.45%) compared to MOO (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BATT dropped -69.38% vs MOO's -69.53%.

Which ETF is better, BATT or MOO?

On 5-year performance, BATT leads with 1.94% vs -0.93% for MOO. On fees, MOO is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, MOO has been the lower-risk option at 3.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BATT or MOO?

Over the 5-year period, BATT has performed better with a 1.94% return vs -0.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BATT or MOO?

MOO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BATT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BATT or MOO?

MOO has the higher dividend yield at 2.29%, compared with 1.55% for BATT.

What is the main difference between BATT and MOO?

BATT is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while MOO is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Amplify and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for BATT and 0.55% for MOO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BATT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 0.64), 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.