AQWA vs. LIT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AQWA (Global X Clean Water ETF) and LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AQWA is a Water Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Clean Water Industry Index, while LIT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AQWA returned 4.62%/yr vs 4.98%/yr for LIT. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AQWA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LIT.

Performance

AQWA vs. LIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Clean Water ETF (AQWA) 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, AQWA achieves a -0.68% return, which is significantly lower than LIT's 30.84% return.

AQWA

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: -1.97%
• YTD: -0.68%
• 6M: -3.10%
• 1Y: 0.82%
• 3Y*: 9.10%
• 5Y*: 4.62%
• 10Y*: —

LIT

• 1D: -1.78%
• 1M: -2.59%
• YTD: 30.84%
• 6M: 34.89%
• 1Y: 135.24%
• 3Y*: 11.20%
• 5Y*: 4.98%
• 10Y*: 14.81%

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

AQWA vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
AQWA Global X Clean Water ETF	-0.68%	13.15%	4.34%	20.13%	-19.89%	15.85%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	30.84%	60.05%	-19.19%	-12.18%	-29.91%	45.81%

Correlation

The correlation between AQWA and LIT is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.44
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2021	0.48

The correlation between AQWA and LIT shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.48 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AQWA vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AQWA	LIT
Industrials	56.9%	26.0%
Utilities	34.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	-
Technology	2.0%	11.5%
Consumer Cyclical	1.7%	7.0%
Basic Materials	1.7%	55.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

AQWA vs. LIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

AQWA

AQWA Risk / Return Rank: 9
AQWA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
AQWA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
AQWA Omega Ratio Rank: 9
AQWA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
AQWA Martin Ratio Rank: 9

LIT

LIT Risk / Return Rank: 94
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 90
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

AQWA vs. LIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Clean Water ETF (AQWA) 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.

	AQWA	LIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.06	4.16	-4.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.18	4.45	-4.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.59	-0.57
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.07	10.37	-10.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.17	35.19	-35.02
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AQWA vs. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AQWA Sharpe Ratio is 0.06, which is lower than the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 4.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AQWA 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AQWA	LIT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.06	4.16	-4.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	0.16	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	0.27	+0.05

Drawdowns

AQWA vs. LIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AQWA drawdown since its inception was -29.44%, smaller than the maximum LIT drawdown of -65.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AQWA and LIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	AQWA	LIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.44%	-65.91%	+36.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.34%	-13.11%	+0.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.55%	-53.01%	+38.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.44%	-65.91%	+36.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.78%	-8.53%	-2.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.27%	-33.63%	+25.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.90%	3.86%	+1.04%

Volatility

AQWA vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Clean Water ETF (AQWA) is 3.94%, while Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a volatility of 8.67%. This indicates that AQWA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AQWA	LIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.94%	8.67%	-4.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.85%	22.00%	-11.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.33%	32.68%	-18.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.75%	31.83%	-15.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.65%	30.66%	-14.01%

AQWA vs. LIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

AQWA vs. LIT - Dividend Comparison

AQWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.48%, more than LIT's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AQWA Global X Clean Water ETF	1.48%	1.47%	1.40%	1.53%	1.56%	1.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	0.37%	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 AQWA and LIT in my portfolio?

AQWA and LIT have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AQWA or LIT?

LIT has higher volatility (8.67%) compared to AQWA (3.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AQWA dropped -29.44% vs LIT's -65.91%.

Which ETF is better, AQWA or LIT?

On 5-year performance, LIT leads with 4.98% vs 4.62% for AQWA. On fees, AQWA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, AQWA has been the lower-risk option at 3.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AQWA or LIT?

Over the 5-year period, LIT has performed better with a 4.98% return vs 4.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AQWA or LIT?

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

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

AQWA has the higher dividend yield at 1.48%, compared with 0.37% for LIT.

What is the main difference between AQWA and LIT?

AQWA is categorized as Water Equities, while LIT is Commodity Producers Equities. AQWA tracks Solactive Global Clean Water Industry Index, while LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AQWA and 0.75% for LIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.16 vs 0.06), 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.