ANV vs. LQTI
ANV (GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF) and LQTI (FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ANV charges 1.07%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LQTI.
Performance
ANV vs. LQTI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ANV
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LQTI
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- -1.17%
- 6M
- -0.64%
- YTD
- -0.55%
- 1Y
- 3.50%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ANV vs. LQTI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ANV GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF | 7.35% |
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF | -0.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between ANV and LQTI is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2026 | 0.19 |
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
ANV vs. LQTI — Risk / Return Rank
ANV
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LQTI
ANV vs. LQTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF (ANV) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). 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.
| ANV | LQTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.12 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.03 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 2.89 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ANV vs. LQTI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ANV drawdown since its inception was -2.82%, smaller than the maximum LQTI drawdown of -3.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ANV and LQTI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ANV | LQTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.82% | -3.41% | +0.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -3.41% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.54% | -2.14% | +1.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.59% | -0.93% | +0.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.21% | — |
Volatility
ANV vs. LQTI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ANV | LQTI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.43% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 4.13% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.30% | 5.15% | +5.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.30% | 5.90% | +4.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.30% | 5.90% | +4.40% |
ANV vs. LQTI - Expense Ratio Comparison
ANV has a 1.07% expense ratio, which is higher than LQTI's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
ANV vs. LQTI - Dividend Comparison
ANV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.98%, less than LQTI's 9.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
ANV GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF | 6.98% | 0.00% |
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF | 9.23% | 7.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ANV and LQTI have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.07% for ANV.
LQTI has the higher dividend yield at 9.23%, compared with 6.98% for ANV.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 1.07% for ANV and 0.65% for LQTI.
Find the right allocation for ANV and LQTI
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