COPP vs. LIT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

COPP (Sprott Copper Miners ETF) and LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds - COPP tracks the Nasdaq Sprott Copper Miners Index while LIT tracks the Solactive Global Lithium Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, COPP returned 111.49% vs 135.24% for LIT. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. COPP charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LIT.

Performance

COPP vs. LIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Copper Miners ETF (COPP) 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, COPP achieves a 26.69% return, which is significantly lower than LIT's 30.84% return.

COPP

• 1D: -3.50%
• 1M: 22.98%
• YTD: 26.69%
• 6M: 39.51%
• 1Y: 111.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 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)

COPP vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
COPP Sprott Copper Miners ETF	26.69%	74.02%	4.18%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	30.84%	60.05%	-7.79%

Correlation

The correlation between COPP and LIT is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2024	0.61

The correlation between COPP and LIT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

COPP vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	COPP	LIT
Basic Materials	92.0%	55.4%
Financial Services	0.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	7.0%
Industrials	0.1%	26.0%
Energy	0.1%	-
Technology	0.1%	11.5%
Consumer Defensive	0.1%	-
Healthcare	0.1%	-
Communication Services	0.1%	-
Utilities	0.1%	-
Real Estate	0.0%	-

Return for Risk

COPP vs. LIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

COPP

COPP Risk / Return Rank: 70
COPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
COPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
COPP Omega Ratio Rank: 61
COPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
COPP Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

COPP vs. LIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Copper Miners ETF (COPP) 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.

	COPP	LIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.62	4.16	-1.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.98	4.45	-1.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.59	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.88	10.37	-6.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.39	35.19	-21.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

COPP vs. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COPP Sharpe Ratio is 2.62, which is lower than the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 4.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COPP 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

	COPP	LIT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.62	4.16	-1.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.16	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.11	0.27	+0.84

Drawdowns

COPP vs. LIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COPP drawdown since its inception was -44.37%, smaller than the maximum LIT drawdown of -65.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COPP and LIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	COPP	LIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.37%	-65.91%	+21.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.91%	-13.11%	-15.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-53.01%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-65.91%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.50%	-8.53%	+5.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.02%	-33.63%	+19.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.35%	3.86%	+4.49%

Volatility

COPP vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Copper Miners ETF (COPP) has a higher volatility of 15.22% compared to Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) at 8.67%. This indicates that COPP'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

	COPP	LIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.22%	8.67%	+6.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.30%	22.00%	+14.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.84%	32.68%	+10.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	40.80%	31.83%	+8.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.80%	30.66%	+10.14%

COPP vs. LIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

COPP has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than LIT's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

COPP vs. LIT - Dividend Comparison

COPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, more than LIT's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COPP Sprott Copper Miners ETF	1.87%	2.37%	2.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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 COPP and LIT in my portfolio?

COPP and LIT have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, COPP or LIT?

COPP has higher volatility (15.22%) compared to LIT (8.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COPP dropped -44.37% vs LIT's -65.91%.

Which ETF is better, COPP or LIT?

On 1-year performance, LIT leads with 135.24% vs 111.49% for COPP. On fees, COPP is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LIT has been the lower-risk option at 8.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, COPP or LIT?

Over the 1-year period, LIT has performed better with a 135.24% return vs 111.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, COPP or LIT?

COPP is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.

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

COPP has the higher dividend yield at 1.87%, compared with 0.37% for LIT.

What is the main difference between COPP and LIT?

COPP tracks Nasdaq Sprott Copper Miners Index, while LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index. They also come from different issuers: Sprott and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for COPP and 0.75% for LIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.16 vs 2.62), 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.