PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PLTW vs. CHAT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PLTW vs. CHAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF (PLTW) and Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PLTW achieves a -26.21% return, which is significantly lower than CHAT's 74.30% return.


PLTW

1D
-7.81%
1M
-4.39%
YTD
-26.21%
6M
-26.03%
1Y
-0.85%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CHAT

1D
-0.66%
1M
27.78%
YTD
74.30%
6M
73.13%
1Y
144.01%
3Y*
55.51%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PLTW vs. CHAT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
PLTW
PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF
-26.21%59.45%
CHAT
Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF
74.30%39.60%

Correlation

The correlation between PLTW and CHAT is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025

0.51

The correlation between PLTW and CHAT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.43 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

PLTW vs. CHAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PLTW
CHAT

Technology

20.0%
76.5%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

-

5.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

0.0%

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

0.8%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

PLTW
20.0%
CHAT
76.5%

Basic Materials

PLTW

-

CHAT

-

Communication Services

PLTW

-

CHAT
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

PLTW

-

CHAT
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

PLTW

-

CHAT

-

Energy

PLTW

-

CHAT

-

Financial Services

PLTW

-

CHAT
0.0%

Healthcare

PLTW

-

CHAT

-

Industrials

PLTW

-

CHAT
0.8%

Real Estate

PLTW

-

CHAT

-

Utilities

PLTW

-

CHAT

-

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

PLTW vs. CHAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PLTW
PLTW Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
PLTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PLTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
PLTW Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
PLTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
PLTW Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

CHAT
CHAT Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
CHAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CHAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
CHAT Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
CHAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
CHAT Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PLTW vs. CHAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF (PLTW) and Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT). 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.


PLTWCHATDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

1.65

-0.60

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.02

8.90

-8.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.03

26.26

-26.29

PLTW vs. CHAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PLTW Sharpe Ratio is -0.01, which is lower than the CHAT Sharpe Ratio of 4.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PLTW and CHAT, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PLTWCHATDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.01

4.72

-4.74

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.19

1.98

-1.79

Drawdowns

PLTW vs. CHAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PLTW drawdown since its inception was -46.29%, which is greater than CHAT's maximum drawdown of -31.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PLTW and CHAT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PLTWCHATDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.29%

-31.34%

-14.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-46.29%

-16.28%

-30.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-31.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-39.64%

-0.66%

-38.98%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.57%

-5.35%

-14.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

25.21%

5.51%

+19.70%

Volatility

PLTW vs. CHAT - Volatility Comparison

PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF (PLTW) has a higher volatility of 22.32% compared to Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT) at 11.70%. This indicates that PLTW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CHAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PLTWCHATDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

22.32%

11.70%

+10.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

46.26%

24.62%

+21.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

61.73%

30.74%

+30.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

72.85%

29.90%

+42.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

72.85%

29.90%

+42.95%

PLTW vs. CHAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PLTW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than CHAT's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

PLTW vs. CHAT - Dividend Comparison

PLTW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 121.30%, more than CHAT's 1.64% yield.


PositionTTM2025
CHAT
Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF
1.64%2.85%
PLTW
PLTR WeeklyPay™ ETF
121.30%72.40%

Frequently Asked Questions


PLTW and CHAT have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PLTW has higher volatility (22.32%) compared to CHAT (11.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PLTW dropped -46.29% vs CHAT's -31.34%.

On 1-year performance, CHAT leads with 144.01% vs -0.85% for PLTW. On fees, CHAT is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, CHAT has been the lower-risk option at 11.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CHAT has performed better with a 144.01% return vs -0.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CHAT is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for PLTW.

PLTW has the higher dividend yield at 121.30%, compared with 1.64% for CHAT.

PLTW is categorized as Derivative Income, while CHAT is Technology Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for PLTW and 0.75% for CHAT.

CHAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.72 vs -0.01), 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 PLTW and CHAT

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