DAT vs. LRNZ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

DAT (ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF) and LRNZ (TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DAT is a Technology Equities fund tracking the FactSet Big Data Refiners Index, while LRNZ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TrueMark Investments. DAT is passively managed, while LRNZ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DAT returned 12.94%/yr vs 25.07%/yr for LRNZ. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DAT charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for LRNZ.

Performance

DAT vs. LRNZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF (DAT) and TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DAT achieves a -12.67% return, which is significantly lower than LRNZ's 27.27% return.

DAT

• 1D: -2.02%
• 1M: -3.57%
• YTD: -12.67%
• 6M: -15.01%
• 1Y: -11.07%
• 3Y*: 12.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LRNZ

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: 11.82%
• YTD: 27.27%
• 6M: 25.14%
• 1Y: 42.76%
• 3Y*: 25.07%
• 5Y*: 5.90%
• 10Y*: —

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

DAT vs. LRNZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DAT ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF	-12.67%	3.49%	33.22%	51.76%	-44.33%	-4.44%
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF	27.27%	22.27%	2.01%	67.11%	-51.46%	3.84%

Correlation

The correlation between DAT and LRNZ is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2021	0.88

The correlation between DAT and LRNZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (1 year) to 0.88 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

DAT vs. LRNZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DAT	LRNZ
Technology	96.9%	82.1%
Communication Services	2.3%	2.9%
Utilities	1.2%	-
Healthcare	0.7%	15.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

DAT vs. LRNZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

DAT

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

LRNZ

LRNZ Risk / Return Rank: 36
LRNZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
LRNZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
LRNZ Omega Ratio Rank: 38
LRNZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
LRNZ Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

DAT vs. LRNZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF (DAT) and TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ). 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.

	DAT	LRNZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.37	1.42	-1.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.33	1.98	-2.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.24	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.32	1.60	-1.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.72	3.87	-4.59

DAT vs. LRNZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DAT Sharpe Ratio is -0.37, which is lower than the LRNZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DAT and LRNZ, 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

DAT vs. LRNZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DAT drawdown since its inception was -56.22%, smaller than the maximum LRNZ drawdown of -61.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DAT and LRNZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	DAT	LRNZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.22%	-61.33%	+5.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.70%	-26.89%	-7.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.73%	-33.10%	-1.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-61.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.95%	-5.28%	-13.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.09%	-26.51%	+0.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.42%	11.07%	+4.35%

Volatility

DAT vs. LRNZ - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF (DAT) and TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) have volatilities of 13.74% and 13.78%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DAT	LRNZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.74%	13.78%	-0.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.43%	24.46%	+0.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.36%	30.37%	-0.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.96%	37.43%	-3.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.96%	37.68%	-3.72%

DAT vs. LRNZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

DAT has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than LRNZ's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

DAT vs. LRNZ - Dividend Comparison

Neither DAT nor LRNZ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DAT ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DAT and LRNZ in my portfolio?

DAT and LRNZ have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DAT or LRNZ?

LRNZ has higher volatility (13.78%) compared to DAT (13.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DAT dropped -56.22% vs LRNZ's -61.33%.

Which ETF is better, DAT or LRNZ?

On 3-year performance, LRNZ leads with 25.07% vs 12.94% for DAT. On fees, DAT is cheaper at 0.58% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DAT or LRNZ?

Over the 3-year period, LRNZ has performed better with a 25.07% return vs 12.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DAT or LRNZ?

DAT is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for LRNZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DAT or LRNZ?

DAT and LRNZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between DAT and LRNZ?

DAT is categorized as Technology Equities, while LRNZ is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and TrueMark Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for DAT and 0.68% for LRNZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LRNZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.42 vs -0.37), 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.