PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BATT vs. SWAN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BATT vs. SWAN - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BATT achieves a 26.16% return, which is significantly higher than SWAN's 5.21% return.


BATT

1D
-1.64%
1M
4.50%
YTD
26.16%
6M
29.61%
1Y
103.56%
3Y*
14.36%
5Y*
3.45%
10Y*

SWAN

1D
-0.61%
1M
3.71%
YTD
5.21%
6M
4.34%
1Y
17.67%
3Y*
12.85%
5Y*
3.38%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BATT vs. SWAN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
BATT
Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF
26.16%59.70%-13.93%-7.05%-32.25%16.52%44.43%-2.40%-15.85%
SWAN
Amplify BlackSwan Growth & Treasury Core ETF
5.21%13.93%13.44%12.07%-27.77%10.55%16.17%22.03%-2.23%

Correlation

The correlation between BATT and SWAN is 0.54, 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

0.54

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.50

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2018

0.47

The correlation between BATT and SWAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

BATT vs. SWAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BATT
SWAN

Basic Materials

57.0%
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

18.9%
10.1%

Industrials

16.9%
8.3%

Technology

5.6%
35.6%

Communication Services

0.0%
11.2%

Financial Services

0.0%
11.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.9%

Energy

-

3.5%

Healthcare

-

8.5%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Utilities

-

2.4%

Basic Materials

BATT
57.0%
SWAN
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

BATT
18.9%
SWAN
10.1%

Industrials

BATT
16.9%
SWAN
8.3%

Technology

BATT
5.6%
SWAN
35.6%

Communication Services

BATT
0.0%
SWAN
11.2%

Financial Services

BATT
0.0%
SWAN
11.8%

Consumer Defensive

BATT

-

SWAN
4.9%

Energy

BATT

-

SWAN
3.5%

Healthcare

BATT

-

SWAN
8.5%

Real Estate

BATT

-

SWAN
1.9%

Utilities

BATT

-

SWAN
2.4%

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

BATT vs. SWAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

BATT
BATT Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

SWAN
SWAN Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
SWAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SWAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
SWAN Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
SWAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
SWAN Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
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.

BATT vs. SWAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) and Amplify BlackSwan Growth & Treasury Core ETF (SWAN). 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.


BATTSWANDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.98

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.34

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.12

2.52

+3.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

22.20

9.93

+12.28

BATT vs. SWAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BATT Sharpe Ratio is 3.38, which is higher than the SWAN Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BATT and SWAN, 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


BATTSWANDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.38

1.89

+1.49

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

0.30

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.01

0.58

-0.56

Drawdowns

BATT vs. SWAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BATT drawdown since its inception was -69.38%, which is greater than SWAN's maximum drawdown of -31.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BATT and SWAN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BATTSWANDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-69.38%

-31.04%

-38.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.03%

-7.05%

-9.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-47.65%

-12.07%

-35.58%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.98%

-31.04%

-30.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.44%

-0.61%

-2.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-34.78%

-8.88%

-25.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.68%

1.78%

+2.90%

Volatility

BATT vs. SWAN - Volatility Comparison

Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) has a higher volatility of 10.29% compared to Amplify BlackSwan Growth & Treasury Core ETF (SWAN) at 3.48%. This indicates that BATT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SWAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BATTSWANDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.29%

3.48%

+6.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.67%

7.28%

+17.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

30.80%

9.39%

+21.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.57%

11.33%

+18.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.60%

12.47%

+18.13%

BATT vs. SWAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

BATT has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than SWAN's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

BATT vs. SWAN - Dividend Comparison

BATT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than SWAN's 2.79% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
BATT
Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF
1.47%1.85%3.17%3.23%4.14%2.32%0.21%3.22%0.89%
SWAN
Amplify BlackSwan Growth & Treasury Core ETF
2.79%2.86%2.54%2.98%2.12%5.04%1.64%3.69%0.29%

Frequently Asked Questions


BATT and SWAN have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BATT has higher volatility (10.29%) compared to SWAN (3.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BATT dropped -69.38% vs SWAN's -31.04%.

On 5-year performance, BATT leads with 3.45% vs 3.38% for SWAN. On fees, SWAN is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, SWAN has been the lower-risk option at 3.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, BATT has performed better with a 3.45% return vs 3.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SWAN is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BATT.

SWAN has the higher dividend yield at 2.79%, compared with 1.47% for BATT.

BATT is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while SWAN is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for BATT and 0.49% for SWAN.

BATT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.38 vs 1.89), 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 BATT and SWAN

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