CZAR vs. GXLC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CZAR (Themes Natural Monopoly ETF) and GXLC (Global X U.S. 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - CZAR tracks the Solactive Natural Monopoly Index - Benchmark TR Gross while GXLC tracks the Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CZAR charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for GXLC.

Performance

CZAR vs. GXLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CZAR achieves a -3.66% return, which is significantly lower than GXLC's 8.31% return.

CZAR

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: -3.86%
• YTD: -3.66%
• 6M: -3.68%
• 1Y: 0.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GXLC

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: -1.12%
• YTD: 8.31%
• 6M: 7.39%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CZAR vs. GXLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CZAR Themes Natural Monopoly ETF	-3.66%	-0.01%
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF	8.31%	3.22%

Correlation

The correlation between CZAR and GXLC is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025	0.63

Return for Risk

CZAR vs. GXLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

CZAR

CZAR Risk / Return Rank: 10
CZAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
CZAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
CZAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9
CZAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
CZAR Martin Ratio Rank: 10

GXLC

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

CZAR vs. GXLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). 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.

	CZAR	GXLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.08	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.19	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.10	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.29	—	—

Drawdowns

CZAR vs. GXLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CZAR drawdown since its inception was -13.38%, which is greater than GXLC's maximum drawdown of -9.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZAR and GXLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	CZAR	GXLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.38%	-9.08%	-4.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.54%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.32%	-3.05%	-3.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.23%	-1.54%	-0.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.23%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CZAR	GXLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.88%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.96%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.13%	13.85%	-1.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.98%	13.85%	+1.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.98%	13.85%	+1.13%

CZAR vs. GXLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

CZAR has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than GXLC's 0.02% expense ratio.

Dividends

CZAR vs. GXLC - Dividend Comparison

CZAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%, more than GXLC's 0.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CZAR Themes Natural Monopoly ETF	1.53%	1.47%	0.94%
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF	0.65%	0.30%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CZAR and GXLC in my portfolio?

CZAR and GXLC have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CZAR or GXLC?

On fees, GXLC is cheaper at 0.02% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CZAR or GXLC?

GXLC is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CZAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CZAR or GXLC?

CZAR has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 0.65% for GXLC.

What is the main difference between CZAR and GXLC?

CZAR tracks Solactive Natural Monopoly Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while GXLC tracks Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: Themes and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CZAR and 0.02% for GXLC.