ERNZ vs. WLTG
ERNZ (TrueShares Active Yield ETF) and WLTG (WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ERNZ returned 2.28% vs 27.96% for WLTG. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.
Performance
ERNZ vs. WLTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ERNZ achieves a 4.89% return, which is significantly lower than WLTG's 7.58% return.
ERNZ
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 4.89%
- 6M
- 3.58%
- 1Y
- 2.28%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
WLTG
- 1D
- -0.75%
- 1M
- 1.47%
- YTD
- 7.58%
- 6M
- 8.60%
- 1Y
- 27.96%
- 3Y*
- 23.74%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ERNZ vs. WLTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
ERNZ TrueShares Active Yield ETF | 4.89% | -6.50% | 3.43% |
WLTG WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF | 7.58% | 24.55% | 17.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between ERNZ and WLTG is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2024 | 0.52 |
The correlation between ERNZ and WLTG shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.52 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ERNZ vs. WLTG — Risk / Return Rank
ERNZ
WLTG
ERNZ vs. WLTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Active Yield ETF (ERNZ) and WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF (WLTG). 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.
| ERNZ | WLTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.87 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.38 | -0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.22 | 2.94 | -2.72 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.47 | 13.22 | -12.75 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ERNZ | WLTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 | 2.11 | -1.87 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.06 | 0.69 | -0.63 |
Drawdowns
ERNZ vs. WLTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ERNZ drawdown since its inception was -14.16%, smaller than the maximum WLTG drawdown of -25.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ERNZ and WLTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ERNZ | WLTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.16% | -25.14% | +10.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.61% | -9.56% | -1.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -17.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.59% | -0.75% | -4.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.58% | -9.08% | +4.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.88% | 2.12% | +2.76% |
Volatility
ERNZ vs. WLTG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for TrueShares Active Yield ETF (ERNZ) is 0.00%, while WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF (WLTG) has a volatility of 2.87%. This indicates that ERNZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WLTG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ERNZ | WLTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.00% | 2.87% | -2.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.40% | 10.16% | -5.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.75% | 13.31% | -3.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.77% | 15.14% | -3.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.77% | 15.14% | -3.37% |
ERNZ vs. WLTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both ERNZ and WLTG have an expense ratio of 0.75%.
Dividends
ERNZ vs. WLTG - Dividend Comparison
ERNZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.37%, more than WLTG's 4.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ERNZ TrueShares Active Yield ETF | 6.37% | 9.90% | 5.51% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
WLTG WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF | 4.12% | 4.43% | 0.55% | 0.71% | 0.44% | 0.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ERNZ and WLTG have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
WLTG has higher volatility (2.87%) compared to ERNZ (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ERNZ dropped -14.16% vs WLTG's -25.14%.
On 1-year performance, WLTG leads with 27.96% vs 2.28% for ERNZ. Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. On volatility, ERNZ has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, WLTG has performed better with a 27.96% return vs 2.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ERNZ and WLTG have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.
ERNZ has the higher dividend yield at 6.37%, compared with 4.12% for WLTG.
They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and WealthTrust.
WLTG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 0.24), 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.
Find the right allocation for ERNZ and WLTG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer