PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HCOW vs. IGF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HCOW vs. IGF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

HCOW (Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF) and IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HCOW is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Amplify, while IGF is a Infrastructure Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net). HCOW is actively managed, while IGF is passively managed. Over the past year, HCOW returned 23.43% vs 16.30% for IGF. Their 0.51 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. HCOW charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for IGF.

Performance

HCOW vs. IGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF (HCOW) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with HCOW having a 10.71% return and IGF slightly lower at 10.41%.

HCOW

1D
0.33%
1M
5.12%
6M
9.66%
YTD
10.71%
1Y
23.43%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
10.16%

IGF

1D
-0.28%
1M
-0.09%
6M
5.19%
YTD
10.41%
1Y
16.30%
3Y*
16.16%
5Y*
11.05%
10Y*
8.14%
ALL TIME*
4.91%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

HCOW

Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF
$145.82K$136.25K$131.36K

IGF

iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
$38.15M$37.64M$47.97M

HCOW vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
HCOW
Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF		10.71%5.76%7.63%4.66%
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF		10.41%21.31%14.81%5.37%

Correlation

The correlation between HCOW and IGF is 0.40, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 20, 2023

0.51

The correlation between HCOW and IGF shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.51 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HCOW vs. IGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
HCOW
IGF

Financial Services

20.1%

-

Consumer Cyclical

17.8%

-

Technology

17.1%

-

Industrials

15.7%
36.4%

Healthcare

10.9%

-

Energy

8.4%
20.5%

Basic Materials

5.8%

-

Communication Services

2.6%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.5%

-

Utilities

2.3%
40.0%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Financial Services

HCOW
20.1%
IGF

-

Consumer Cyclical

HCOW
17.8%
IGF

-

Technology

HCOW
17.1%
IGF

-

Industrials

HCOW
15.7%
IGF
36.4%

Healthcare

HCOW
10.9%
IGF

-

Energy

HCOW
8.4%
IGF
20.5%

Basic Materials

HCOW
5.8%
IGF

-

Communication Services

HCOW
2.6%
IGF

-

Consumer Defensive

HCOW
2.5%
IGF

-

Utilities

HCOW
2.3%
IGF
40.0%

Real Estate

HCOW

-

IGF
0.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF

iShares Global Infrastructure ETF

Often compared with HCOW:
HCOW vs. QDVOHCOW vs. COWZHCOW vs. COWSHCOW vs. SGLCHCOW vs. GCOWHCOW vs. VFLOHCOW vs. SCHD
Often compared with IGF:
IGF vs. IFRAIGF vs. GIIIGF vs. NFRAIGF vs. SPYIGF vs. GLIFXIGF vs. VPUIGF vs. XLU

Return for Risk

HCOW vs. IGF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
HCOW
HCOW Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
HCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
HCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
HCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
HCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
IGF
IGF Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
IGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
IGF Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
IGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
IGF Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

HCOW vs. IGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF (HCOW) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

HCOWIGFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.56
1.55

+0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.33
2.25

+0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.28

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.42

2.83

+0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.36

7.59

+3.78

HCOW vs. IGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HCOW Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the IGF Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HCOW and IGF, 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...

Drawdowns

HCOW vs. IGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HCOW drawdown since its inception was -24.15%, smaller than the maximum IGF drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HCOW and IGF.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HCOWIGFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.15%

-58.33%

+34.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.29%

-5.87%

-0.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

—

-11.31%

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-20.83%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-42.11%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.92%

-2.34%

+1.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.73%

-11.79%

+7.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.89%

2.19%

-0.30%

Volatility

HCOW vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison

Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF (HCOW) has a higher volatility of 4.10% compared to iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) at 2.75%. This indicates that HCOW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HCOWIGFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.10%

2.75%

+1.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.13%

8.92%

+0.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.86%

10.69%

+3.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.39%

13.95%

+3.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.39%

16.71%

+0.68%

HCOW vs. IGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

HCOW has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than IGF's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

HCOW vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison

HCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.56%, more than IGF's 2.89% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HCOW
Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF		11.56%10.88%8.13%1.99%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF		2.89%3.23%3.21%3.36%2.67%2.42%2.33%3.27%3.52%2.95%2.98%3.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

HCOW and IGF have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

HCOW has higher volatility (4.10%) compared to IGF (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HCOW dropped -24.15% vs IGF's -58.33%.

On 1-year performance, HCOW leads with 23.43% vs 16.30% for IGF. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, IGF has been the lower-risk option at 2.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, HCOW has performed better with a 23.43% return vs 16.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IGF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for HCOW.

HCOW has the higher dividend yield at 11.56%, compared with 2.89% for IGF.

HCOW is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while IGF is Infrastructure Equities. They also come from different issuers: Amplify and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for HCOW and 0.39% for IGF.

HCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 1.55), 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 HCOW and IGF

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