OMAH vs. DIVO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

OMAH (VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF) and DIVO (Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, OMAH returned 11.47% vs 17.37% for DIVO. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. OMAH charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for DIVO.

Performance

OMAH vs. DIVO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) and Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF (DIVO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with OMAH having a 5.30% return and DIVO slightly higher at 5.40%.

OMAH

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: -1.97%
• YTD: 5.30%
• 6M: 5.12%
• 1Y: 11.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DIVO

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: -0.03%
• YTD: 5.40%
• 6M: 4.24%
• 1Y: 17.37%
• 3Y*: 15.15%
• 5Y*: 10.94%
• 10Y*: —

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

OMAH vs. DIVO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	5.30%	6.55%
DIVO Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF	5.40%	15.33%

Correlation

The correlation between OMAH and DIVO is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2025	0.73

The correlation between OMAH and DIVO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

OMAH vs. DIVO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OMAH	DIVO
Financial Services	37.3%	30.3%
Communication Services	19.8%	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	13.2%	7.4%
Technology	11.6%	14.6%
Energy	8.8%	7.0%
Industrials	4.9%	16.1%
Healthcare	4.4%	6.8%
Consumer Cyclical	4.1%	10.9%
Basic Materials	-	4.3%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

OMAH vs. DIVO — Risk / Return Rank

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

OMAH

OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 51
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 40
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 54

DIVO

DIVO Risk / Return Rank: 60
DIVO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
DIVO Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
DIVO Omega Ratio Rank: 55
DIVO Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
DIVO Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

OMAH vs. DIVO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) and Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF (DIVO). 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.

	OMAH	DIVO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.90	-0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.01	2.81	-0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.33	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.84	2.93	+0.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.13	10.48	-1.35

OMAH vs. DIVO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OMAH Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the DIVO Sharpe Ratio of 1.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OMAH and DIVO, 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

OMAH vs. DIVO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OMAH drawdown since its inception was -11.83%, smaller than the maximum DIVO drawdown of -30.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMAH and DIVO.

Drawdown Indicators

	OMAH	DIVO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.83%	-30.04%	+18.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.00%	-5.95%	+2.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.12%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-13.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.97%	-1.61%	-0.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.27%	-2.60%	+1.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.26%	1.66%	-0.40%

Volatility

OMAH vs. DIVO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) is 2.21%, while Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF (DIVO) has a volatility of 2.94%. This indicates that OMAH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DIVO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OMAH	DIVO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.21%	2.94%	-0.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.58%	7.14%	-1.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.04%	9.21%	-1.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.03%	11.95%	+1.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.03%	14.82%	-1.79%

OMAH vs. DIVO - Expense Ratio Comparison

OMAH has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than DIVO's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

OMAH vs. DIVO - Dividend Comparison

OMAH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.05%, more than DIVO's 6.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
DIVO Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF	6.43%	6.44%	4.70%	4.67%	4.76%	4.79%	4.91%	8.16%	5.27%	3.83%
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	14.05%	12.86%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OMAH and DIVO in my portfolio?

OMAH and DIVO have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OMAH or DIVO?

DIVO has higher volatility (2.94%) compared to OMAH (2.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMAH dropped -11.83% vs DIVO's -30.04%.

Which ETF is better, OMAH or DIVO?

On 1-year performance, DIVO leads with 17.37% vs 11.47% for OMAH. On fees, DIVO is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, OMAH has been the lower-risk option at 2.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OMAH or DIVO?

Over the 1-year period, DIVO has performed better with a 17.37% return vs 11.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OMAH or DIVO?

DIVO is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for OMAH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OMAH or DIVO?

OMAH has the higher dividend yield at 14.05%, compared with 6.43% for DIVO.

What is the main difference between OMAH and DIVO?

They also come from different issuers: VistaShares and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for OMAH and 0.56% for DIVO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DIVO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 1.44), 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.