CAOS vs. ISWN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) and ISWN (Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF) are both Options Trading funds. CAOS is actively managed, while ISWN is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CAOS returned 4.26%/yr vs 8.12%/yr for ISWN. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CAOS charges 0.63%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for ISWN.

Performance

CAOS vs. ISWN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) and Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAOS achieves a 0.82% return, which is significantly lower than ISWN's 4.28% return.

CAOS

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -0.09%
• YTD: 0.82%
• 6M: 0.69%
• 1Y: 1.88%
• 3Y*: 4.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ISWN

• 1D: -0.80%
• 1M: 2.01%
• YTD: 4.28%
• 6M: 4.94%
• 1Y: 13.27%
• 3Y*: 8.12%
• 5Y*: -0.37%
• 10Y*: —

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

CAOS vs. ISWN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.82%	2.55%	5.33%	7.97%
ISWN Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF	4.28%	23.23%	-3.96%	5.07%

Correlation

The correlation between CAOS and ISWN is -0.22, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.22
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2023	0.03

The correlation between CAOS and ISWN shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to 0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CAOS vs. ISWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CAOS	ISWN
Technology	33.1%	10.3%
Financial Services	12.4%	1.6%
Communication Services	10.4%	4.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	7.7%
Healthcare	9.6%	10.6%
Industrials	8.5%	19.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.4%	6.7%
Energy	4.1%	4.0%
Utilities	2.6%	4.0%
Real Estate	2.0%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.9%	5.9%

Return for Risk

CAOS vs. ISWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 40
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 39
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 39

ISWN

ISWN Risk / Return Rank: 30
ISWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
ISWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
ISWN Omega Ratio Rank: 30
ISWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
ISWN Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

CAOS vs. ISWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) and Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN). 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.

	CAOS	ISWN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	1.09	+0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.98	1.60	+0.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.20	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.49	1.38	+1.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.22	4.67	+1.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CAOS vs. ISWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAOS Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is comparable to the ISWN Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAOS and ISWN, 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

	CAOS	ISWN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.24	1.09	+0.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.03	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.21	0.01	+1.20

Drawdowns

CAOS vs. ISWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAOS drawdown since its inception was -3.60%, smaller than the maximum ISWN drawdown of -32.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAOS and ISWN.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAOS	ISWN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.60%	-32.35%	+28.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.76%	-9.63%	+8.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.60%	-13.77%	+10.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-32.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.07%	-4.03%	+2.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.90%	-16.17%	+15.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.30%	2.85%	-2.55%

Volatility

CAOS vs. ISWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) is 0.26%, while Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN) has a volatility of 4.67%. This indicates that CAOS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CAOS	ISWN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.26%	4.67%	-4.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.03%	10.10%	-9.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.52%	12.20%	-10.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.26%	11.67%	-7.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.26%	11.57%	-7.31%

CAOS vs. ISWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAOS has a 0.63% expense ratio, which is higher than ISWN's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAOS vs. ISWN - Dividend Comparison

CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ISWN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ISWN Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF	2.82%	2.89%	3.27%	2.91%	2.00%	0.76%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAOS and ISWN in my portfolio?

CAOS and ISWN have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CAOS or ISWN?

ISWN has higher volatility (4.67%) compared to CAOS (0.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAOS dropped -3.60% vs ISWN's -32.35%.

Which ETF is better, CAOS or ISWN?

On 3-year performance, ISWN leads with 8.12% vs 4.26% for CAOS. On fees, ISWN is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAOS or ISWN?

Over the 3-year period, ISWN has performed better with a 8.12% return vs 4.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAOS or ISWN?

ISWN is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for CAOS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CAOS or ISWN?

ISWN has the higher dividend yield at 2.82%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between CAOS and ISWN?

They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.63% for CAOS and 0.49% for ISWN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 1.09), 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.