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

Performance

CNBS vs. BATT - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNBS achieves a 4.70% return, which is significantly lower than BATT's 23.77% return.


CNBS

1D
6.54%
1M
0.77%
YTD
4.70%
6M
26.27%
1Y
91.63%
3Y*
-0.72%
5Y*
-32.48%
10Y*

BATT

1D
-1.90%
1M
1.12%
YTD
23.77%
6M
26.50%
1Y
96.07%
3Y*
13.93%
5Y*
3.05%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CNBS vs. BATT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
CNBS
Amplify Seymour Cannabis ETF
4.70%15.33%-29.41%-16.11%-63.98%-19.02%31.94%-44.97%
BATT
Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF
23.77%59.70%-13.93%-7.05%-32.25%16.52%44.43%-2.33%

Correlation

The correlation between CNBS and BATT is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

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

0.31

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

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019

0.43

The correlation between CNBS and BATT shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (1 year) to 0.43 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CNBS vs. BATT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CNBS
BATT

Healthcare

63.1%

-

Real Estate

13.8%

-

Technology

10.7%
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

7.0%

-

Consumer Cyclical

3.4%
18.9%

Financial Services

1.9%
0.0%

Industrials

0.1%
16.9%

Basic Materials

-

57.0%

Communication Services

-

0.0%

Energy

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

CNBS
63.1%
BATT

-

Real Estate

CNBS
13.8%
BATT

-

Technology

CNBS
10.7%
BATT
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

CNBS
7.0%
BATT

-

Consumer Cyclical

CNBS
3.4%
BATT
18.9%

Financial Services

CNBS
1.9%
BATT
0.0%

Industrials

CNBS
0.1%
BATT
16.9%

Basic Materials

CNBS

-

BATT
57.0%

Communication Services

CNBS

-

BATT
0.0%

Energy

CNBS

-

BATT

-

Utilities

CNBS

-

BATT

-

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

CNBS vs. BATT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNBS
CNBS Risk / Return Rank: 3333
Overall Rank
CNBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNBS Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
CNBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNBS Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank

BATT
BATT Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

CNBS vs. BATT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Seymour Cannabis ETF (CNBS) and Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT). 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.


CNBSBATTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.47

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.80

5.67

-3.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.30

20.54

-17.24

CNBS vs. BATT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNBS Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is lower than the BATT Sharpe Ratio of 3.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNBS and BATT, 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


CNBSBATTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

3.13

-2.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.50

0.10

-0.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.39

0.01

-0.40

Drawdowns

CNBS vs. BATT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNBS drawdown since its inception was -95.71%, which is greater than BATT's maximum drawdown of -69.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNBS and BATT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CNBSBATTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-95.71%

-69.38%

-26.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-51.25%

-17.03%

-34.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-73.41%

-47.65%

-25.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-93.58%

-61.98%

-31.60%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-90.88%

-5.27%

-85.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-71.27%

-34.77%

-36.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

27.83%

4.69%

+23.14%

Volatility

CNBS vs. BATT - Volatility Comparison

Amplify Seymour Cannabis ETF (CNBS) has a higher volatility of 18.65% compared to Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) at 10.42%. This indicates that CNBS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BATT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CNBSBATTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

18.65%

10.42%

+8.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

76.84%

24.76%

+52.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

105.28%

30.87%

+74.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

64.80%

29.57%

+35.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

61.37%

30.59%

+30.78%

CNBS vs. BATT - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNBS has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than BATT's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

CNBS vs. BATT - Dividend Comparison

CNBS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BATT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
BATT
Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF
1.50%1.85%3.17%3.23%4.14%2.32%0.21%3.22%0.89%
CNBS
Amplify Seymour Cannabis ETF
0.00%0.00%43.54%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.58%0.58%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CNBS and BATT have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CNBS has higher volatility (18.65%) compared to BATT (10.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNBS dropped -95.71% vs BATT's -69.38%.

On 5-year performance, BATT leads with 3.05% vs -32.48% for CNBS. On fees, BATT is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, BATT has been the lower-risk option at 10.42%. 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 3.05% return vs -32.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BATT is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CNBS.

BATT has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 0.00% for CNBS.

CNBS is categorized as Cannabis, while BATT is Commodity Producers Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CNBS and 0.59% for BATT.

BATT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.13 vs 0.88), 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 CNBS and BATT

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