FDLS vs. LST
FDLS (Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF) and LST (Leuthold Select Industries ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. FDLS is passively managed, while LST is actively managed. Over the past year, FDLS returned 33.04% vs 34.83% for LST. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FDLS charges 0.76%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LST.
Performance
FDLS vs. LST - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FDLS achieves a 13.12% return, which is significantly lower than LST's 16.81% return.
FDLS
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- -0.93%
- YTD
- 13.12%
- 6M
- 13.26%
- 1Y
- 33.04%
- 3Y*
- 19.65%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LST
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 7.41%
- YTD
- 16.81%
- 6M
- 18.46%
- 1Y
- 34.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FDLS vs. LST - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FDLS Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF | 13.12% | 14.15% |
LST Leuthold Select Industries ETF | 16.81% | 15.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDLS and LST is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2025 | 0.88 |
The correlation between FDLS and LST has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
FDLS vs. LST — Risk / Return Rank
FDLS
LST
FDLS vs. LST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF (FDLS) and Leuthold Select Industries ETF (LST). 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.
| FDLS | LST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.43 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.48 | 3.23 | +0.25 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.96 | 13.38 | +0.58 |
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
| FDLS | LST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.99 | 2.44 | -0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.86 | 1.38 | -0.52 |
Drawdowns
FDLS vs. LST - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDLS drawdown since its inception was -23.32%, which is greater than LST's maximum drawdown of -19.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDLS and LST.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FDLS | LST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.32% | -19.47% | -3.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.55% | -10.85% | +1.30% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.32% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.66% | -0.18% | -2.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.88% | -2.92% | -0.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.37% | 2.61% | -0.24% |
Volatility
FDLS vs. LST - Volatility Comparison
Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF (FDLS) has a higher volatility of 4.36% compared to Leuthold Select Industries ETF (LST) at 4.11%. This indicates that FDLS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FDLS | LST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.36% | 4.11% | +0.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.45% | 11.72% | +0.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.71% | 14.33% | +2.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.07% | 17.93% | +1.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.07% | 17.93% | +1.14% |
FDLS vs. LST - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDLS has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than LST's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
FDLS vs. LST - Dividend Comparison
FDLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, less than LST's 1.15% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDLS Inspire Fidelis Multi Factor ETF | 0.87% | 0.86% | 7.26% | 0.97% | 0.31% |
LST Leuthold Select Industries ETF | 1.15% | 1.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FDLS and LST have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FDLS has higher volatility (4.36%) compared to LST (4.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDLS dropped -23.32% vs LST's -19.47%.
On 1-year performance, LST leads with 34.83% vs 33.04% for FDLS. On fees, LST is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LST has been the lower-risk option at 4.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LST has performed better with a 34.83% return vs 33.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LST is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for FDLS.
LST has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.87% for FDLS.
They also come from different issuers: Inspire and Leuthold Group. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for FDLS and 0.65% for LST.
LST currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 vs 1.99), 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 FDLS and LST
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