BATT vs. TURF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BATT (Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF) and TURF (T. Rowe Price Natural Resources ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BATT charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.44%/yr for TURF.

Performance

BATT vs. TURF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BATT achieves a 26.16% return, which is significantly higher than TURF's 19.55% return.

BATT

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

TURF

• 1D: -0.82%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: 19.55%
• 6M: 22.12%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BATT vs. TURF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	26.16%	55.06%
TURF T. Rowe Price Natural Resources ETF	19.55%	17.05%

Correlation

The correlation between BATT and TURF 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2025	0.60

BATT vs. TURF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BATT	TURF
Basic Materials	57.0%	33.9%
Consumer Cyclical	18.9%	-
Industrials	16.9%	1.6%
Technology	5.6%	0.4%
Communication Services	0.0%	3.8%
Financial Services	0.0%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	8.5%
Energy	-	29.2%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	0.3%

Return for Risk

BATT vs. TURF — Risk / Return Rank

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

BATT

BATT Risk / Return Rank: 87
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 82
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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. TURF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) and T. Rowe Price Natural Resources ETF (TURF). 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.

	BATT	TURF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.38	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.69	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.12	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.20	—	—
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

	BATT	TURF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.38	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.01	2.52	-2.51

Drawdowns

BATT vs. TURF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BATT drawdown since its inception was -69.38%, which is greater than TURF's maximum drawdown of -6.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BATT and TURF.

Drawdown Indicators

	BATT	TURF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-69.38%	-6.84%	-62.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-47.65%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-61.98%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.44%	-2.54%	-0.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-34.78%	-1.53%	-33.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.68%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BATT	TURF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.29%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.67%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.80%	16.50%	+14.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.57%	16.50%	+13.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.60%	16.50%	+14.10%

BATT vs. TURF - Expense Ratio Comparison

BATT has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than TURF's 0.44% expense ratio.

Dividends

BATT vs. TURF - Dividend Comparison

BATT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, more than TURF's 1.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	1.47%	1.85%	3.17%	3.23%	4.14%	2.32%	0.21%	3.22%	0.89%
TURF T. Rowe Price Natural Resources ETF	1.25%	1.49%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BATT and TURF in my portfolio?

BATT and TURF 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.

Which ETF is better, BATT or TURF?

On fees, TURF is cheaper at 0.44% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BATT or TURF?

TURF is cheaper with a 0.44% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BATT.

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

BATT has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 1.25% for TURF.

What is the main difference between BATT and TURF?

They also come from different issuers: Amplify and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for BATT and 0.44% for TURF.