QDVO vs. ENFR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QDVO (Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF) and ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QDVO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Amplify, while ENFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. QDVO is actively managed, while ENFR is passively managed. Over the past year, QDVO returned 21.13% vs 27.76% for ENFR. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QDVO charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ENFR.

Performance

QDVO vs. ENFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO) and Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDVO achieves a 5.51% return, which is significantly lower than ENFR's 24.93% return.

QDVO

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: -3.62%
• YTD: 5.51%
• 6M: 4.58%
• 1Y: 21.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ENFR

• 1D: 1.51%
• 1M: -4.52%
• YTD: 24.93%
• 6M: 25.03%
• 1Y: 27.76%
• 3Y*: 28.90%
• 5Y*: 20.07%
• 10Y*: 11.98%

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

QDVO vs. ENFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QDVO Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF	5.51%	20.16%	9.76%
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	24.93%	5.88%	15.00%

Correlation

The correlation between QDVO and ENFR is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2024	0.15

The correlation between QDVO and ENFR shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.15 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QDVO vs. ENFR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QDVO	ENFR
Technology	50.4%	-
Communication Services	15.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.9%	-
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	-
Healthcare	4.9%	-
Financial Services	3.8%	0.1%
Industrials	2.9%	3.4%
Basic Materials	2.2%	-
Energy	0.9%	98.5%
Utilities	0.4%	1.4%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

QDVO vs. ENFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDVO

QDVO Risk / Return Rank: 48
QDVO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
QDVO Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
QDVO Omega Ratio Rank: 48
QDVO Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
QDVO Martin Ratio Rank: 49

ENFR

ENFR Risk / Return Rank: 57
ENFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
ENFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
ENFR Omega Ratio Rank: 54
ENFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ENFR Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

QDVO vs. ENFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO) and Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR). 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.

	QDVO	ENFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.68	1.88	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.31	2.59	-0.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.32	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.08	3.23	-1.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.08	8.24	-0.16

QDVO vs. ENFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDVO Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is comparable to the ENFR Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDVO and ENFR, 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

QDVO vs. ENFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDVO drawdown since its inception was -17.75%, smaller than the maximum ENFR drawdown of -68.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDVO and ENFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDVO	ENFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.75%	-68.28%	+50.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.21%	-8.64%	-1.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.58%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.29%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-62.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.81%	-4.71%	-0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.41%	-15.94%	+13.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.62%	3.38%	-0.76%

Volatility

QDVO vs. ENFR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO) is 4.47%, while Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) has a volatility of 5.69%. This indicates that QDVO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ENFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDVO	ENFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.47%	5.69%	-1.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.59%	11.60%	-2.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.69%	14.86%	-2.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.54%	19.25%	-1.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.54%	24.68%	-7.14%

QDVO vs. ENFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDVO has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than ENFR's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDVO vs. ENFR - Dividend Comparison

QDVO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.53%, more than ENFR's 4.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	4.02%	4.77%	4.41%	5.48%	5.23%	7.86%	7.57%	5.81%	3.98%	2.98%	3.31%	3.34%
QDVO Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF	10.53%	9.92%	2.79%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDVO and ENFR in my portfolio?

QDVO and ENFR have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QDVO or ENFR?

ENFR has higher volatility (5.69%) compared to QDVO (4.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDVO dropped -17.75% vs ENFR's -68.28%.

Which ETF is better, QDVO or ENFR?

On 1-year performance, ENFR leads with 27.76% vs 21.13% for QDVO. On fees, ENFR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, QDVO has been the lower-risk option at 4.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QDVO or ENFR?

Over the 1-year period, ENFR has performed better with a 27.76% return vs 21.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDVO or ENFR?

ENFR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for QDVO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QDVO or ENFR?

QDVO has the higher dividend yield at 10.53%, compared with 4.02% for ENFR.

What is the main difference between QDVO and ENFR?

QDVO is categorized as Derivative Income, while ENFR is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Amplify and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for QDVO and 0.35% for ENFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ENFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 1.68), 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.