MOO vs. BATT

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

MOO (VanEck Agribusiness ETF) and BATT (Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MOO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Agribusiness Index, while BATT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Amplify. MOO is passively managed, while BATT is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, MOO returned -0.93%/yr vs 1.94%/yr for BATT. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MOO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for BATT.

Performance

MOO vs. BATT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MOO achieves a 7.97% return, which is significantly lower than BATT's 19.49% return.

MOO

• 1D: 0.85%
• 1M: -4.12%
• YTD: 7.97%
• 6M: 8.15%
• 1Y: 8.56%
• 3Y*: 1.51%
• 5Y*: -0.93%
• 10Y*: 7.09%

BATT

• 1D: 3.19%
• 1M: -6.31%
• YTD: 19.49%
• 6M: 21.87%
• 1Y: 88.06%
• 3Y*: 10.63%
• 5Y*: 1.94%
• 10Y*: —

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

MOO vs. BATT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	7.97%	15.61%	-12.43%	-8.57%	-8.10%	23.99%	14.59%	22.29%	-8.06%
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	19.49%	59.70%	-13.93%	-7.05%	-32.25%	16.52%	44.43%	-2.40%	-42.27%

Correlation

The correlation between MOO and BATT is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2018	0.63

Over the past year, the correlation between MOO and BATT has dropped to 0.38 - well below their long-term average of 0.63, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MOO vs. BATT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MOO	BATT
Consumer Defensive	36.8%	-
Basic Materials	25.5%	57.0%
Industrials	20.9%	16.9%
Healthcare	16.8%	-
Communication Services	-	0.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	18.9%
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	5.6%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MOO vs. BATT — Risk / Return Rank

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

MOO

MOO Risk / Return Rank: 21
MOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Omega Ratio Rank: 20
MOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

BATT

BATT Risk / Return Rank: 86
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 80
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

MOO vs. BATT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) 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.

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.

	MOO	BATT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.64	2.65	-2.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.00	3.04	-2.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.41	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.87	5.03	-4.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.42	16.97	-14.55

MOO vs. BATT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MOO Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is lower than the BATT Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MOO 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.

Drawdowns

MOO vs. BATT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MOO drawdown since its inception was -69.53%, roughly equal to the maximum BATT drawdown of -69.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOO and BATT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MOO	BATT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-69.53%	-69.38%	-0.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.38%	-17.03%	+6.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.83%	-47.65%	+20.82%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.52%	-61.98%	+22.46%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.52%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.10%	-8.54%	-10.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.97%	-34.68%	+17.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.70%	5.04%	-1.34%

Volatility

MOO vs. BATT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) is 3.50%, while Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) has a volatility of 13.45%. This indicates that MOO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BATT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MOO	BATT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.50%	13.45%	-9.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.85%	26.58%	-15.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.16%	32.35%	-18.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.15%	29.87%	-12.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.19%	30.74%	-12.55%

MOO vs. BATT - Expense Ratio Comparison

MOO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than BATT's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

MOO vs. BATT - Dividend Comparison

MOO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.29%, more than BATT's 1.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	1.55%	1.85%	3.17%	3.23%	4.14%	2.32%	0.21%	3.22%	0.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	2.29%	2.47%	3.41%	2.93%	2.15%	1.17%	1.10%	1.26%	1.69%	1.44%	2.14%	2.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MOO and BATT in my portfolio?

MOO and BATT have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MOO or BATT?

BATT has higher volatility (13.45%) compared to MOO (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOO dropped -69.53% vs BATT's -69.38%.

Which ETF is better, MOO or BATT?

On 5-year performance, BATT leads with 1.94% vs -0.93% for MOO. On fees, MOO is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, MOO has been the lower-risk option at 3.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MOO or BATT?

Over the 5-year period, BATT has performed better with a 1.94% return vs -0.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MOO or BATT?

MOO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BATT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MOO or BATT?

MOO has the higher dividend yield at 2.29%, compared with 1.55% for BATT.

What is the main difference between MOO and BATT?

MOO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BATT is Commodity Producers Equities. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for MOO and 0.59% for BATT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BATT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 0.64), 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.