TLTP vs. RWL
TLTP (Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF) and RWL (Invesco S&P 500 Revenue 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 RWL is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, TLTP returned 6.77% vs 26.76% for RWL. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TLTP charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RWL.
Performance
TLTP vs. RWL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TLTP achieves a 0.22% return, which is significantly lower than RWL's 11.07% return.
TLTP
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- 0.71%
- YTD
- 0.22%
- 6M
- -0.63%
- 1Y
- 6.77%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RWL
- 1D
- -0.42%
- 1M
- 3.13%
- YTD
- 11.07%
- 6M
- 11.66%
- 1Y
- 26.76%
- 3Y*
- 19.96%
- 5Y*
- 12.89%
- 10Y*
- 13.96%
TLTP vs. RWL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TLTP Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF | 0.22% | 5.39% | -3.95% |
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF | 11.07% | 18.65% | 0.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between TLTP and RWL is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 30, 2024 | 0.21 |
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
TLTP vs. RWL — Risk / Return Rank
TLTP
RWL
TLTP vs. RWL - 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 Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL). 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 | RWL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.80 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.48 | -0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.18 | 4.05 | -2.87 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.19 | 17.12 | -13.92 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| TLTP | RWL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.89 | 2.69 | -1.80 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.89 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.83 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.09 | 0.58 | -0.48 |
Drawdowns
TLTP vs. RWL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TLTP drawdown since its inception was -8.54%, smaller than the maximum RWL drawdown of -54.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TLTP and RWL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TLTP | RWL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.54% | -54.83% | +46.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.76% | -6.64% | +0.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.39% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.49% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.04% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.18% | -0.57% | -2.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.26% | -6.45% | +3.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.12% | 1.57% | +0.55% |
Volatility
TLTP vs. RWL - Volatility Comparison
Amplify Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Target High Income ETF (TLTP) has a higher volatility of 2.40% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) at 2.12%. This indicates that TLTP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TLTP | RWL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.40% | 2.12% | +0.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.10% | 7.12% | -2.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.62% | 10.00% | -2.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.84% | 14.50% | -4.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.84% | 16.86% | -7.02% |
TLTP vs. RWL - Expense Ratio Comparison
TLTP has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than RWL's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
TLTP vs. RWL - Dividend Comparison
TLTP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.16%, more than RWL's 1.25% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF | 1.25% | 1.35% | 1.43% | 1.60% | 1.62% | 1.35% | 1.75% | 1.87% | 1.99% | 1.60% | 1.71% | 1.97% |
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TLTP and RWL have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TLTP has higher volatility (2.40%) compared to RWL (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TLTP dropped -8.54% vs RWL's -54.83%.
On 1-year performance, RWL leads with 26.76% vs 6.77% for TLTP. On fees, TLTP is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, RWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RWL has performed better with a 26.76% return vs 6.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TLTP is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWL.
TLTP has the higher dividend yield at 13.16%, compared with 1.25% for RWL.
TLTP is categorized as Government Bonds, while RWL is S&P 500. TLTP tracks Bloomberg U.S. Treasury 20+ Year 12% Premium Covered Call 2.0 Index, while RWL tracks S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: Amplify and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for TLTP and 0.39% for RWL.
RWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 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.
Find the right allocation for TLTP and RWL
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