HCOW vs. SEIV

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

HCOW (Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF) and SEIV (SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, HCOW returned 23.43% vs 41.26% for SEIV. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. HCOW charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for SEIV.

Performance

HCOW vs. SEIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF (HCOW) and SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF (SEIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HCOW achieves a 10.71% return, which is significantly lower than SEIV's 19.61% return.

HCOW

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

SEIV

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 3.04%
• 6M: 17.35%
• YTD: 19.61%
• 1Y: 41.26%
• 3Y*: 24.62%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.48%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
HCOW Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF	$145.82K	$136.25K	$131.36K
SEIV SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF	$8.91M	$9.09M	$6.11M

HCOW vs. SEIV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HCOW Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF	10.71%	5.76%	7.63%	4.66%
SEIV SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF	19.61%	27.43%	19.73%	10.03%

Correlation

The correlation between HCOW and SEIV is 0.75, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 20, 2023	0.78

The correlation between HCOW and SEIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

HCOW vs. SEIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HCOW	SEIV
Financial Services	20.1%	23.0%
Consumer Cyclical	17.8%	18.5%
Technology	17.1%	17.0%
Industrials	15.7%	1.9%
Healthcare	10.9%	18.1%
Energy	8.4%	0.9%
Basic Materials	5.8%	6.1%
Communication Services	2.6%	6.5%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	3.9%
Utilities	2.3%	2.4%
Real Estate	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

HCOW vs. SEIV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

HCOW

HCOW Risk / Return Rank: 76
HCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
HCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
HCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 68
HCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
HCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 83

SEIV

SEIV Risk / Return Rank: 95
SEIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
SEIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
SEIV Omega Ratio Rank: 95
SEIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
SEIV Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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. SEIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF (HCOW) and SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF (SEIV). 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.

	HCOW	SEIV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	3.07	-1.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.33	4.18	-1.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.55	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.42	5.66	-2.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.36	21.01	-9.64

HCOW vs. SEIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HCOW Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is lower than the SEIV Sharpe Ratio of 3.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HCOW and SEIV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

HCOW vs. SEIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HCOW drawdown since its inception was -24.15%, which is greater than SEIV's maximum drawdown of -18.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HCOW and SEIV.

Drawdown Indicators

	HCOW	SEIV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.15%	-18.18%	-5.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.29%	-6.95%	+0.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.92%	-0.83%	-0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.73%	-3.42%	-1.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.89%	1.87%	+0.02%

Volatility

HCOW vs. SEIV - Volatility Comparison

Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF (HCOW) has a higher volatility of 4.10% compared to SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF (SEIV) at 3.31%. This indicates that HCOW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SEIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HCOW	SEIV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.10%	3.31%	+0.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.13%	9.48%	-0.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.86%	12.82%	+1.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.39%	16.54%	+0.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.39%	16.54%	+0.85%

HCOW vs. SEIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

HCOW has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than SEIV's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

HCOW vs. SEIV - Dividend Comparison

HCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.56%, more than SEIV's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
HCOW Amplify Cash Flow High Income ETF	11.56%	10.88%	8.13%	1.99%	0.00%
SEIV SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF	1.44%	1.51%	1.66%	2.08%	1.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HCOW and SEIV in my portfolio?

HCOW and SEIV have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HCOW or SEIV?

HCOW has higher volatility (4.10%) compared to SEIV (3.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HCOW dropped -24.15% vs SEIV's -18.18%.

Which ETF is better, HCOW or SEIV?

On 1-year performance, SEIV leads with 41.26% vs 23.43% for HCOW. On fees, SEIV is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, SEIV has been the lower-risk option at 3.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HCOW or SEIV?

Over the 1-year period, SEIV has performed better with a 41.26% return vs 23.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HCOW or SEIV?

SEIV is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for HCOW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HCOW or SEIV?

HCOW has the higher dividend yield at 11.56%, compared with 1.44% for SEIV.

What is the main difference between HCOW and SEIV?

They also come from different issuers: Amplify and SEI. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for HCOW and 0.15% for SEIV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SEIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.07 vs 1.56), 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.