EKG vs. LFSC

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF (EKG) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC).

EKG and LFSC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. EKG is a passively managed fund by First Trust that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ Lux Health Tech Index. It was launched on Mar 22, 2022. LFSC is an actively managed fund by F/m Investments. It was launched on Oct 30, 2024.

Performance

EKG vs. LFSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF (EKG) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

EKG vs. LFSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EKG First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF	-14.59%	11.89%	3.40%
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	-4.45%	56.54%	-6.02%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EKG achieves a -14.59% return, which is significantly lower than LFSC's -4.45% return.

EKG

• 1D: 2.98%
• 1M: -9.70%
• YTD: -14.59%
• 6M: -6.74%
• 1Y: 3.73%
• 3Y*: -1.76%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LFSC

• 1D: 6.16%
• 1M: -3.82%
• YTD: -4.45%
• 6M: 17.66%
• 1Y: 55.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EKG vs. LFSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

EKG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than LFSC's 0.54% expense ratio.

EKG

First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF

LFSC

F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF

Return for Risk

EKG vs. LFSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

EKG

EKG Risk / Return Rank: 16
EKG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
EKG Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
EKG Omega Ratio Rank: 16
EKG Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
EKG Martin Ratio Rank: 16

LFSC

LFSC Risk / Return Rank: 86
LFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
LFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
LFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 82
LFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
LFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

EKG vs. LFSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF (EKG) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC). 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.

	EKG	LFSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.15	1.93	-1.78
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.40	2.65	-2.25
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.33	-0.28
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.16	3.20	-3.04
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.54	8.96	-8.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EKG vs. LFSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EKG Sharpe Ratio is 0.15, which is lower than the LFSC Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EKG and LFSC, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EKG	LFSC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15	1.93	-1.78
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.18	0.94	-1.12

Correlation

The correlation between EKG and LFSC is 0.65, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

EKG vs. LFSC - Dividend Comparison

Neither EKG nor LFSC has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

EKG vs. LFSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EKG drawdown since its inception was -43.82%, which is greater than LFSC's maximum drawdown of -29.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EKG and LFSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	EKG	LFSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.82%	-29.74%	-14.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.99%	-16.25%	-5.74%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.74%	-11.08%	-13.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.65%	-8.25%	-14.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.43%	5.80%	+0.63%

Volatility

EKG vs. LFSC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Nasdaq Lux Digital Health Solutions ETF (EKG) is 7.93%, while F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) has a volatility of 10.35%. This indicates that EKG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LFSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EKG	LFSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.93%	10.35%	-2.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.45%	19.97%	-5.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.70%	29.24%	-4.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.08%	29.31%	-2.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.08%	29.31%	-2.23%