PLA vs. CHPY
PLA (GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF) and CHPY (YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PLA charges 1.07%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for CHPY.
Performance
PLA vs. CHPY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
PLA
- 1D
- 1.29%
- 1M
- -7.63%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CHPY
- 1D
- 4.58%
- 1M
- 8.84%
- YTD
- 88.37%
- 6M
- 86.89%
- 1Y
- 135.29%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PLA vs. CHPY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
PLA GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF | -4.47% |
CHPY YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF | 23.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between PLA and CHPY is 0.29, 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 May 19, 2026 | 0.29 |
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
PLA vs. CHPY — Risk / Return Rank
PLA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CHPY
PLA vs. CHPY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF (PLA) and YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF (CHPY). 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.
| PLA | CHPY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.62 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 11.19 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 38.46 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PLA vs. CHPY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PLA drawdown since its inception was -12.39%, roughly equal to the maximum CHPY drawdown of -12.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PLA and CHPY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PLA | CHPY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.39% | -12.19% | -0.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -12.17% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.75% | -4.07% | -4.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.45% | -2.18% | -2.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.53% | — |
Volatility
PLA vs. CHPY - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PLA | CHPY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 20.28% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 28.75% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.88% | 33.34% | -9.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.88% | 36.69% | -12.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.88% | 36.69% | -12.81% |
PLA vs. CHPY - Expense Ratio Comparison
PLA has a 1.07% expense ratio, which is higher than CHPY's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
PLA vs. CHPY - Dividend Comparison
PLA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%, less than CHPY's 29.48% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CHPY YieldMax Semiconductor Portfolio Option Income ETF | 29.48% | 28.19% |
PLA GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF | 1.79% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PLA and CHPY have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CHPY is cheaper at 0.99% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CHPY is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.07% for PLA.
CHPY has the higher dividend yield at 29.48%, compared with 1.79% for PLA.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 1.07% for PLA and 0.99% for CHPY.
Find the right allocation for PLA and CHPY
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