CNBS vs. SLJY
CNBS (Amplify Seymour Cannabis ETF) and SLJY (Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CNBS is a Cannabis fund actively managed by Amplify, while SLJY is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Amplify. Both are actively managed. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.
Performance
CNBS vs. SLJY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CNBS achieves a 4.70% return, which is significantly lower than SLJY's 8.47% return.
CNBS
- 1D
- 6.54%
- 1M
- 0.77%
- YTD
- 4.70%
- 6M
- 26.27%
- 1Y
- 91.63%
- 3Y*
- -0.72%
- 5Y*
- -32.48%
- 10Y*
- —
SLJY
- 1D
- 0.70%
- 1M
- 4.73%
- YTD
- 8.47%
- 6M
- 17.30%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CNBS vs. SLJY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CNBS Amplify Seymour Cannabis ETF | 4.70% | 4.73% |
SLJY Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF | 8.47% | 43.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNBS and SLJY is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2025 | 0.21 |
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. SLJY — Risk / Return Rank
CNBS
SLJY
CNBS vs. SLJY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Seymour Cannabis ETF (CNBS) and Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF (SLJY). 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.
| CNBS | SLJY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.80 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.30 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CNBS | SLJY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.88 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.50 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.39 | 1.52 | -1.91 |
Drawdowns
CNBS vs. SLJY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNBS drawdown since its inception was -95.71%, which is greater than SLJY's maximum drawdown of -30.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNBS and SLJY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNBS | SLJY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -95.71% | -30.60% | -65.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -51.25% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -73.41% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -93.58% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -90.88% | -21.10% | -69.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -71.27% | -9.66% | -61.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 27.83% | — | — |
Volatility
CNBS vs. SLJY - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNBS | SLJY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 18.65% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 76.84% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 105.28% | 49.47% | +55.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 64.80% | 49.47% | +15.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 61.37% | 49.47% | +11.90% |
CNBS vs. SLJY - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CNBS and SLJY have an expense ratio of 0.75%.
Dividends
CNBS vs. SLJY - Dividend Comparison
CNBS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SLJY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.60%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNBS Amplify Seymour Cannabis ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 43.54% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.58% | 0.58% |
SLJY Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF | 16.60% | 6.26% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CNBS and SLJY have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNBS and SLJY have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.
SLJY has the higher dividend yield at 16.60%, compared with 0.00% for CNBS.
CNBS is categorized as Cannabis, while SLJY is Derivative Income.
Find the right allocation for CNBS and SLJY
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