GLOW vs. LENS

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

GLOW (VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF) and LENS (Sarmaya Thematic ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GLOW returned 23.06% vs 39.98% for LENS. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GLOW charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for LENS.

Performance

GLOW vs. LENS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF (GLOW) and Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLOW achieves a 10.09% return, which is significantly higher than LENS's -1.00% return.

GLOW

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 0.78%
• YTD: 10.09%
• 6M: 9.06%
• 1Y: 23.06%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LENS

• 1D: -3.53%
• 1M: -13.12%
• YTD: -1.00%
• 6M: -3.33%
• 1Y: 39.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GLOW vs. LENS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GLOW VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF	10.09%	17.04%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	-1.00%	56.41%

Correlation

The correlation between GLOW and LENS is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2025	0.40

Return for Risk

GLOW vs. LENS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLOW

GLOW Risk / Return Rank: 62
GLOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
GLOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
GLOW Omega Ratio Rank: 61
GLOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
GLOW Martin Ratio Rank: 66

LENS

LENS Risk / Return Rank: 41
LENS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
LENS Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
LENS Omega Ratio Rank: 45
LENS Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
LENS Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

GLOW vs. LENS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF (GLOW) and Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS). 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.

	GLOW	LENS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.81	1.44	+0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.53	1.82	+0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.26	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.48	1.64	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.49	5.26	+5.22

GLOW vs. LENS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLOW Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is comparable to the LENS Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLOW and LENS, 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

GLOW vs. LENS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLOW drawdown since its inception was -15.58%, smaller than the maximum LENS drawdown of -24.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLOW and LENS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLOW	LENS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.58%	-24.55%	+8.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.33%	-24.55%	+15.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.90%	-24.55%	+22.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.80%	-4.30%	+2.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.20%	7.62%	-5.42%

Volatility

GLOW vs. LENS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF (GLOW) is 5.06%, while Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) has a volatility of 8.97%. This indicates that GLOW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LENS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLOW	LENS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.06%	8.97%	-3.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.56%	23.38%	-12.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.88%	27.92%	-15.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.30%	26.03%	-10.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.30%	26.03%	-10.73%

GLOW vs. LENS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLOW has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is lower than LENS's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLOW vs. LENS - Dividend Comparison

GLOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, less than LENS's 1.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GLOW VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF	1.12%	1.33%	1.18%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	1.62%	1.60%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLOW and LENS in my portfolio?

GLOW and LENS have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GLOW or LENS?

LENS has higher volatility (8.97%) compared to GLOW (5.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLOW dropped -15.58% vs LENS's -24.55%.

Which ETF is better, GLOW or LENS?

On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 39.98% vs 23.06% for GLOW. On fees, GLOW is cheaper at 0.72% per year. On volatility, GLOW has been the lower-risk option at 5.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLOW or LENS?

Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 39.98% return vs 23.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLOW or LENS?

GLOW is cheaper with a 0.72% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLOW or LENS?

LENS has the higher dividend yield at 1.62%, compared with 1.12% for GLOW.

What is the main difference between GLOW and LENS?

They also come from different issuers: VictoryShares and Sarmaya Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for GLOW and 0.79% for LENS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 1.44), 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.