AWF vs TLTP
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund vs Amplify TLT US Treasury 12% Option Income ETF
Quick Verdict
TLTP has a lower expense ratio. AWF delivered stronger 1-year returns. AWF offers more diversification with 1,273 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AWF | TLTP | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.00% | 0.39% | |
| AUM | $973M | $25M | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.98% | 15.05% | |
| Holdings | 1,273 | 5 | |
| YTD Return | -0.58% | -8.87% | |
| 1Y Return | -1.77% | -7.14% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.69% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.83% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.2% | 8.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.0% | -13.3% | |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Amplify ETFs | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Alternative | |
| Inception | Jul 28, 1993 | Oct 29, 2024 |
AWF vs TLTP Performance
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund (AWF) is a ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and Amplify TLT US Treasury 12% Option Income ETF (TLTP) is a ETF from Amplify ETFs. Over the past year AWF returned -1.77% while TLTP returned -7.14%. Year to date, AWF is down 0.58% versus a loss of 8.87% for TLTP.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AWF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.2% compared with 8.7% for TLTP. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -60.0% for AWF and -13.3% for TLTP. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.29. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AWF charges 1.00% per year while TLTP charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $100 vs $39 annually, a gap of $61 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AWF currently yields 6.98% against 15.05% for TLTP.
Holdings Overlap
AWF and TLTP share 0 holdings out of 710 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AWF or TLTP?
AWF has an expense ratio of 1.00% while TLTP charges 0.39%. TLTP is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $61 per year of difference.
Which performed better, AWF or TLTP?
Over the past year AWF returned -1.77% vs -7.14% for TLTP, so AWF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), AWF annualized +0.93% vs -5.01% for TLTP. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, AWF or TLTP?
AWF has been the more volatile fund at 18.2% annualized versus 8.7% for TLTP. Worst drawdown: AWF -60.0% vs TLTP -13.3%.
Should I hold both AWF and TLTP?
AWF and TLTP have a monthly-return correlation of 0.29, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between AWF and TLTP?
AWF and TLTP share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 710 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, AWF or TLTP?
AWF yields 6.98% while TLTP yields 15.05%, so TLTP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.