ARKF vs. LIT

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

ARKF (ARK Fintech Innovation ETF) and LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ARKF is a Blockchain fund actively managed by ARK, while LIT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index. ARKF is actively managed, while LIT is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ARKF returned -5.06%/yr vs 4.01%/yr for LIT. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

ARKF vs. LIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ARK Fintech Innovation ETF (ARKF) 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, ARKF achieves a -18.31% return, which is significantly lower than LIT's 27.00% return.

ARKF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -7.34%
• YTD: -18.31%
• 6M: -21.31%
• 1Y: -11.63%
• 3Y*: 23.97%
• 5Y*: -5.06%
• 10Y*: —

LIT

• 1D: 2.02%
• 1M: -5.27%
• YTD: 27.00%
• 6M: 29.31%
• 1Y: 124.44%
• 3Y*: 9.00%
• 5Y*: 4.01%
• 10Y*: 14.53%

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

ARKF vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ARKF ARK Fintech Innovation ETF	-18.31%	28.67%	34.34%	93.27%	-65.07%	-17.82%	108.03%	20.45%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	27.00%	60.05%	-19.19%	-12.18%	-29.91%	36.74%	127.88%	-3.42%

Correlation

The correlation between ARKF and LIT is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.44
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2019	0.54

The correlation between ARKF and LIT shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.54 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ARKF vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ARKF	LIT
Technology	42.7%	11.5%
Financial Services	28.5%	-
Consumer Cyclical	16.4%	7.0%
Communication Services	12.2%	-
Healthcare	0.2%	-
Basic Materials	-	55.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Industrials	-	26.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ARKF vs. LIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ARKF

ARKF Risk / Return Rank: 7
ARKF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
ARKF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
ARKF Omega Ratio Rank: 7
ARKF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
ARKF Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

ARKF vs. LIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ARK Fintech Innovation ETF (ARKF) 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.

	ARKF	LIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.35	3.57	-3.93
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.28	3.94	-4.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.52	-0.55
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.31	7.36	-7.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.57	27.27	-27.83

ARKF vs. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ARKF Sharpe Ratio is -0.35, which is lower than the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 3.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ARKF 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

ARKF vs. LIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ARKF drawdown since its inception was -78.63%, which is greater than LIT's maximum drawdown of -65.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ARKF and LIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	ARKF	LIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.63%	-65.91%	-12.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-38.50%	-16.46%	-22.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.50%	-53.01%	+14.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-75.30%	-65.91%	-9.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.77%	-11.21%	-27.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-34.95%	-33.59%	-1.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.00%	4.45%	+16.55%

Volatility

ARKF vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ARK Fintech Innovation ETF (ARKF) is 10.36%, while Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a volatility of 11.56%. This indicates that ARKF 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

	ARKF	LIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.36%	11.56%	-1.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.14%	23.80%	+1.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.69%	33.94%	-0.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	42.87%	32.04%	+10.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	39.77%	30.77%	+9.00%

ARKF vs. LIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ARKF and LIT have an expense ratio of 0.75%.

Dividends

ARKF vs. LIT - Dividend Comparison

ARKF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.11%, less than LIT's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ARKF ARK Fintech Innovation ETF	0.11%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.37%	1.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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 ARKF and LIT in my portfolio?

ARKF and LIT have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ARKF or LIT?

LIT has higher volatility (11.56%) compared to ARKF (10.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ARKF dropped -78.63% vs LIT's -65.91%.

Which ETF is better, ARKF or LIT?

On 5-year performance, LIT leads with 4.01% vs -5.06% for ARKF. Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. On volatility, ARKF has been the lower-risk option at 10.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ARKF or LIT?

Over the 5-year period, LIT has performed better with a 4.01% return vs -5.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ARKF or LIT?

ARKF and LIT have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

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

LIT has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.11% for ARKF.

What is the main difference between ARKF and LIT?

ARKF is categorized as Blockchain, while LIT is Commodity Producers Equities. They also come from different issuers: ARK and Global X.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.57 vs -0.35), 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.