YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

YAMZ.NEO (Amazon (AMZN) Yield Shares Purpose ETF) and YAVG.NEO (Broadcom (AVGO) Yield Shares Purpose ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from Purpose Investments. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, YAMZ.NEO returned 22.62% vs 105.48% for YAVG.NEO. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Amazon (AMZN) Yield Shares Purpose ETF (YAMZ.NEO) and Broadcom (AVGO) Yield Shares Purpose ETF (YAVG.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, YAMZ.NEO achieves a 5.68% return, which is significantly lower than YAVG.NEO's 42.78% return.

YAMZ.NEO

• 1D: 2.01%
• 1M: -7.96%
• YTD: 5.68%
• 6M: 10.29%
• 1Y: 22.62%
• 3Y*: 29.37%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

YAVG.NEO

• 1D: -10.74%
• 1M: 0.69%
• YTD: 42.78%
• 6M: 30.18%
• 1Y: 105.48%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
YAMZ.NEO Amazon (AMZN) Yield Shares Purpose ETF	5.68%	5.91%
YAVG.NEO Broadcom (AVGO) Yield Shares Purpose ETF	42.78%	57.91%

Correlation

The correlation between YAMZ.NEO and YAVG.NEO is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.41

Return for Risk

YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

YAMZ.NEO

YAMZ.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 22
YAMZ.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
YAMZ.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
YAMZ.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 23
YAMZ.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
YAMZ.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

YAVG.NEO

YAVG.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 70
YAVG.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
YAVG.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
YAVG.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 71
YAVG.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
YAVG.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amazon (AMZN) Yield Shares Purpose ETF (YAMZ.NEO) and Broadcom (AVGO) Yield Shares Purpose ETF (YAVG.NEO). 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.

	YAMZ.NEO	YAVG.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.70	2.16	-1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.14	2.93	-1.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.41	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.04	4.10	-3.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.59	12.10	-9.51
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current YAMZ.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is lower than the YAVG.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of YAMZ.NEO and YAVG.NEO, 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

	YAMZ.NEO	YAVG.NEO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70	2.16	-1.46
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.22	1.67	-0.45

Drawdowns

YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum YAMZ.NEO drawdown since its inception was -34.37%, smaller than the maximum YAVG.NEO drawdown of -39.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for YAMZ.NEO and YAVG.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	YAMZ.NEO	YAVG.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.37%	-39.57%	+5.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.79%	-25.90%	+4.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.37%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.54%	-11.18%	+2.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.20%	-8.27%	+1.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.75%	8.75%	0.00%

Volatility

YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amazon (AMZN) Yield Shares Purpose ETF (YAMZ.NEO) is 9.66%, while Broadcom (AVGO) Yield Shares Purpose ETF (YAVG.NEO) has a volatility of 16.20%. This indicates that YAMZ.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than YAVG.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	YAMZ.NEO	YAVG.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.66%	16.20%	-6.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.71%	39.35%	-16.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.46%	49.06%	-16.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.24%	53.26%	-19.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.24%	53.26%	-19.02%

Dividends

YAMZ.NEO vs. YAVG.NEO - Dividend Comparison

YAMZ.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.64%, less than YAVG.NEO's 24.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
YAMZ.NEO Amazon (AMZN) Yield Shares Purpose ETF	14.64%	14.12%	8.07%	7.89%	1.02%
YAVG.NEO Broadcom (AVGO) Yield Shares Purpose ETF	24.38%	8.90%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both YAMZ.NEO and YAVG.NEO in my portfolio?

YAMZ.NEO and YAVG.NEO have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.