BETZ vs. EATZ

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

BETZ (Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF) and EATZ (AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF) are both Consumer Discretionary Equities funds. BETZ is passively managed, while EATZ is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BETZ returned -8.45%/yr vs 2.20%/yr for EATZ. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BETZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for EATZ.

Performance

BETZ vs. EATZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ) and AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF (EATZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BETZ achieves a -9.29% return, which is significantly lower than EATZ's 4.80% return.

BETZ

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: -1.76%
• YTD: -9.29%
• 6M: -6.63%
• 1Y: -5.17%
• 3Y*: 5.35%
• 5Y*: -8.45%
• 10Y*: —

EATZ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 4.80%
• 6M: 4.07%
• 1Y: -6.74%
• 3Y*: 10.53%
• 5Y*: 2.20%
• 10Y*: —

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

BETZ vs. EATZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BETZ Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF	-9.29%	15.75%	10.22%	21.17%	-42.02%	-20.82%
EATZ AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF	4.80%	-6.67%	23.21%	25.23%	-20.68%	-5.06%

Correlation

The correlation between BETZ and EATZ is 0.52, 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	0.52
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2021	0.64

The correlation between BETZ and EATZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.65 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BETZ vs. EATZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BETZ	EATZ
Consumer Cyclical	96.4%	78.2%
Technology	2.8%	-
Communication Services	0.8%	2.3%
Financial Services	0.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	16.9%
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	4.9%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BETZ vs. EATZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

BETZ

BETZ Risk / Return Rank: 6
BETZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
BETZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
BETZ Omega Ratio Rank: 6
BETZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
BETZ Martin Ratio Rank: 7

EATZ

EATZ Risk / Return Rank: 10
EATZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
EATZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
EATZ Omega Ratio Rank: 10
EATZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
EATZ Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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.

BETZ vs. EATZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ) and AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF (EATZ). 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.

	BETZ	EATZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.25	0.10	-0.35
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.22	0.28	-0.50
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.03	-0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.22	0.11	-0.33
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.38	0.21	-0.58
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BETZ vs. EATZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BETZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.25, which is lower than the EATZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BETZ and EATZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BETZ	EATZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.25	0.10	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.32	0.10	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.14	0.12	+0.02

Drawdowns

BETZ vs. EATZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BETZ drawdown since its inception was -60.82%, which is greater than EATZ's maximum drawdown of -34.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BETZ and EATZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BETZ	EATZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.82%	-34.40%	-26.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.20%	-23.21%	-5.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.20%	-23.21%	-5.99%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-60.35%	-33.34%	-27.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.64%	-13.56%	-25.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.81%	-13.40%	-20.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.93%	12.82%	+4.11%

Volatility

BETZ vs. EATZ - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ) has a higher volatility of 5.46% compared to AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF (EATZ) at 4.91%. This indicates that BETZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EATZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BETZ	EATZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.46%	4.91%	+0.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.77%	13.48%	+2.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.49%	18.81%	+1.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.95%	21.65%	+5.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.95%	21.60%	+6.35%

BETZ vs. EATZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BETZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than EATZ's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

BETZ vs. EATZ - Dividend Comparison

BETZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.04%, more than EATZ's 0.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BETZ Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF	5.04%	4.57%	0.86%	0.00%	0.66%	0.00%	0.28%
EATZ AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF	0.48%	0.50%	0.18%	0.49%	2.35%	0.15%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BETZ and EATZ in my portfolio?

BETZ and EATZ have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BETZ or EATZ?

BETZ has higher volatility (5.46%) compared to EATZ (4.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BETZ dropped -60.82% vs EATZ's -34.40%.

Which ETF is better, BETZ or EATZ?

On 5-year performance, EATZ leads with 2.20% vs -8.45% for BETZ. On fees, BETZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, EATZ has been the lower-risk option at 4.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BETZ or EATZ?

Over the 5-year period, EATZ has performed better with a 2.20% return vs -8.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BETZ or EATZ?

BETZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for EATZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BETZ or EATZ?

BETZ has the higher dividend yield at 5.04%, compared with 0.48% for EATZ.

What is the main difference between BETZ and EATZ?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill Investments and AdvisorShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for BETZ and 1.00% for EATZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EATZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.10 vs -0.25), 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.