TLTP vs. BATT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TLTP (Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF) and BATT (Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TLTP is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Treasury 20+ Year 12% Premium Covered Call 2.0 Index, while BATT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Amplify. TLTP is passively managed, while BATT is actively managed. Over the past year, TLTP returned 6.77% vs 103.56% for BATT. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TLTP charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for BATT.

Performance

TLTP vs. BATT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF (TLTP) 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, TLTP achieves a 0.22% return, which is significantly lower than BATT's 26.16% return.

TLTP

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 0.71%
• YTD: 0.22%
• 6M: -0.63%
• 1Y: 6.77%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BATT

• 1D: -1.64%
• 1M: 4.50%
• YTD: 26.16%
• 6M: 29.61%
• 1Y: 103.56%
• 3Y*: 14.36%
• 5Y*: 3.45%
• 10Y*: —

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

TLTP vs. BATT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
TLTP Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF	0.22%	5.39%	-3.95%
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	26.16%	59.70%	-4.50%

Correlation

The correlation between TLTP and BATT is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 30, 2024	0.12

Return for Risk

TLTP vs. BATT — Risk / Return Rank

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

TLTP

TLTP Risk / Return Rank: 24
TLTP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
TLTP Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
TLTP Omega Ratio Rank: 23
TLTP Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
TLTP Martin Ratio Rank: 24

BATT

BATT Risk / Return Rank: 87
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 82
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

TLTP vs. BATT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF (TLTP) 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.

	TLTP	BATT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	3.38	-2.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.30	3.69	-2.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.50	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.18	6.12	-4.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.19	22.20	-19.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TLTP vs. BATT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TLTP Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the BATT Sharpe Ratio of 3.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TLTP 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TLTP	BATT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89	3.38	-2.49
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.12	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.09	0.01	+0.08

Drawdowns

TLTP vs. BATT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TLTP drawdown since its inception was -8.54%, smaller than the maximum BATT drawdown of -69.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TLTP and BATT.

Drawdown Indicators

	TLTP	BATT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.54%	-69.38%	+60.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.76%	-17.03%	+11.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-47.65%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-61.98%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.18%	-3.44%	+0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.26%	-34.78%	+31.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	4.68%	-2.56%

Volatility

TLTP vs. BATT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF (TLTP) is 2.40%, while Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) has a volatility of 10.29%. This indicates that TLTP 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

	TLTP	BATT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.40%	10.29%	-7.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.10%	24.67%	-19.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.62%	30.80%	-23.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.84%	29.57%	-19.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.84%	30.60%	-20.76%

TLTP vs. BATT - Expense Ratio Comparison

TLTP has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than BATT's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

TLTP vs. BATT - Dividend Comparison

TLTP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.16%, more than BATT's 1.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	1.47%	1.85%	3.17%	3.23%	4.14%	2.32%	0.21%	3.22%	0.89%
TLTP Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF	13.16%	12.53%	2.08%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TLTP and BATT in my portfolio?

TLTP and BATT have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TLTP or BATT?

BATT has higher volatility (10.29%) compared to TLTP (2.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TLTP dropped -8.54% vs BATT's -69.38%.

Which ETF is better, TLTP or BATT?

On 1-year performance, BATT leads with 103.56% vs 6.77% for TLTP. On fees, TLTP is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, TLTP has been the lower-risk option at 2.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TLTP or BATT?

Over the 1-year period, BATT has performed better with a 103.56% return vs 6.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TLTP or BATT?

TLTP is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BATT.

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

TLTP has the higher dividend yield at 13.16%, compared with 1.47% for BATT.

What is the main difference between TLTP and BATT?

TLTP is categorized as Government Bonds, while BATT is Commodity Producers Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for TLTP and 0.59% for BATT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BATT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.38 vs 0.89), 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.