CHAT vs. CRTC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CHAT (Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF) and CRTC (Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. CHAT is actively managed, while CRTC is passively managed. Over the past year, CHAT returned 144.01% vs 23.78% for CRTC. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CHAT charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CRTC.

Performance

CHAT vs. CRTC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT) and Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CHAT achieves a 74.30% return, which is significantly higher than CRTC's 8.59% return.

CHAT

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: 27.78%
• YTD: 74.30%
• 6M: 73.13%
• 1Y: 144.01%
• 3Y*: 55.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CRTC

• 1D: -1.08%
• 1M: 4.98%
• YTD: 8.59%
• 6M: 8.79%
• 1Y: 23.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CHAT vs. CRTC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CHAT Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF	74.30%	49.85%	30.98%	5.25%
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	8.59%	18.69%	18.05%	7.18%

Correlation

The correlation between CHAT and CRTC is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2023	0.81

The correlation between CHAT and CRTC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

CHAT vs. CRTC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CHAT	CRTC
Technology	76.5%	33.5%
Communication Services	16.6%	16.0%
Consumer Cyclical	5.6%	6.3%
Industrials	0.8%	14.1%
Financial Services	0.0%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.0%
Energy	-	7.1%
Healthcare	-	14.1%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	6.0%

Return for Risk

CHAT vs. CRTC — Risk / Return Rank

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

CHAT

CHAT Risk / Return Rank: 94
CHAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
CHAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
CHAT Omega Ratio Rank: 93
CHAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
CHAT Martin Ratio Rank: 94

CRTC

CRTC Risk / Return Rank: 55
CRTC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
CRTC Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
CRTC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
CRTC Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
CRTC Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

CHAT vs. CRTC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT) and Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC). 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.

	CHAT	CRTC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.72	1.87	+2.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.86	2.56	+2.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	1.32	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.90	2.64	+6.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	26.26	9.88	+16.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CHAT vs. CRTC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CHAT Sharpe Ratio is 4.72, which is higher than the CRTC Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CHAT and CRTC, 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

	CHAT	CRTC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.72	1.87	+2.85
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.98	1.36	+0.62

Drawdowns

CHAT vs. CRTC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CHAT drawdown since its inception was -31.34%, which is greater than CRTC's maximum drawdown of -19.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CHAT and CRTC.

Drawdown Indicators

	CHAT	CRTC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.34%	-19.07%	-12.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.28%	-9.05%	-7.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.34%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.66%	-1.27%	+0.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.35%	-2.13%	-3.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.51%	2.41%	+3.10%

Volatility

CHAT vs. CRTC - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT) has a higher volatility of 11.70% compared to Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC) at 3.20%. This indicates that CHAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRTC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CHAT	CRTC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.70%	3.20%	+8.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.62%	9.64%	+14.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.74%	12.76%	+17.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.90%	15.73%	+14.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.90%	15.73%	+14.17%

CHAT vs. CRTC - Expense Ratio Comparison

CHAT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CRTC's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

CHAT vs. CRTC - Dividend Comparison

CHAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.64%, more than CRTC's 1.00% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CHAT Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF	1.64%	2.85%	0.00%	0.00%
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	1.00%	1.03%	1.13%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CHAT and CRTC in my portfolio?

CHAT and CRTC have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CHAT or CRTC?

CHAT has higher volatility (11.70%) compared to CRTC (3.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CHAT dropped -31.34% vs CRTC's -19.07%.

Which ETF is better, CHAT or CRTC?

On 1-year performance, CHAT leads with 144.01% vs 23.78% for CRTC. On fees, CRTC is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CRTC has been the lower-risk option at 3.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CHAT or CRTC?

Over the 1-year period, CHAT has performed better with a 144.01% return vs 23.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CHAT or CRTC?

CRTC is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CHAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CHAT or CRTC?

CHAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.64%, compared with 1.00% for CRTC.

What is the main difference between CHAT and CRTC?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CHAT and 0.35% for CRTC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CHAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.72 vs 1.87), 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.