AIA vs. LIT

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) and LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AIA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia 50, while LIT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AIA returned 15.05%/yr vs 14.53%/yr for LIT. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AIA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LIT.

Performance

AIA vs. LIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIA achieves a 44.56% return, which is significantly higher than LIT's 27.00% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with AIA having a 15.05% annualized return and LIT not far behind at 14.53%.

AIA

• 1D: 0.54%
• 1M: 3.01%
• YTD: 44.56%
• 6M: 50.54%
• 1Y: 80.18%
• 3Y*: 34.57%
• 5Y*: 11.52%
• 10Y*: 15.05%

LIT

• 1D: 2.02%
• 1M: -8.05%
• YTD: 27.00%
• 6M: 29.31%
• 1Y: 120.44%
• 3Y*: 9.00%
• 5Y*: 4.01%
• 10Y*: 14.53%

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

AIA vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	44.56%	47.79%	20.26%	4.32%	-24.08%	-10.91%	33.73%	22.21%	-14.22%	45.00%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	27.00%	60.05%	-19.19%	-12.18%	-29.91%	36.74%	127.88%	3.27%	-28.63%	64.19%

Correlation

The correlation between AIA and LIT is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2010	0.66

The correlation between AIA and LIT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

AIA vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AIA	LIT
Technology	56.8%	11.5%
Financial Services	19.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	7.0%
Communication Services	8.9%	-
Industrials	2.6%	26.0%
Healthcare	0.9%	-
Energy	0.7%	-
Real Estate	0.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	55.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AIA vs. LIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

AIA

AIA Risk / Return Rank: 91
AIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
AIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
AIA Omega Ratio Rank: 89
AIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
AIA Martin Ratio Rank: 92

LIT

LIT Risk / Return Rank: 94
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 91
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

AIA vs. LIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). 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.

	AIA	LIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.89	3.57	-0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.41	3.94	-0.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.52	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.70	7.36	-1.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.76	27.27	-7.51

AIA vs. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIA Sharpe Ratio is 2.89, which is comparable to the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 3.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIA and LIT, 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

AIA vs. LIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIA drawdown since its inception was -60.89%, smaller than the maximum LIT drawdown of -65.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIA and LIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIA	LIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.89%	-65.91%	+5.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.15%	-16.46%	+2.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.64%	-53.01%	+31.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.11%	-65.91%	+15.80%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.64%	-65.91%	+11.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.44%	-11.21%	+4.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.66%	-33.59%	+16.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.08%	4.45%	-0.37%

Volatility

AIA vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a higher volatility of 14.34% compared to Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) at 11.56%. This indicates that AIA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIA	LIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.34%	11.56%	+2.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.49%	23.80%	+0.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.93%	33.94%	-6.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.96%	32.04%	-6.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.78%	30.77%	-6.99%

AIA vs. LIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than LIT's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

AIA vs. LIT - Dividend Comparison

AIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.73%, more than LIT's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	1.73%	2.50%	2.78%	2.07%	2.59%	1.54%	1.11%	2.24%	2.49%	1.45%	2.29%	2.88%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	0.38%	0.49%	0.93%	1.11%	0.99%	0.22%	0.40%	1.85%	2.52%	3.26%	2.15%	0.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIA and LIT in my portfolio?

AIA and LIT have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AIA or LIT?

AIA has higher volatility (14.34%) compared to LIT (11.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIA dropped -60.89% vs LIT's -65.91%.

Which ETF is better, AIA or LIT?

On 10-year performance, AIA leads with 15.05% vs 14.53% for LIT. On fees, AIA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, LIT has been the lower-risk option at 11.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AIA or LIT?

Over the 10-year period, AIA has performed better with a 15.05% return vs 14.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIA or LIT?

AIA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AIA or LIT?

AIA has the higher dividend yield at 1.73%, compared with 0.38% for LIT.

What is the main difference between AIA and LIT?

AIA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while LIT is Commodity Producers Equities. AIA tracks S&P Asia 50, while LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AIA and 0.75% for LIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.57 vs 2.89), 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.