GNOM vs. LFSC

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

GNOM (Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF) and LFSC (F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. GNOM is passively managed, while LFSC is actively managed. Over the past year, GNOM returned 66.61% vs 78.76% for LFSC. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GNOM charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.54%/yr for LFSC.

Performance

GNOM vs. LFSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with GNOM having a 20.90% return and LFSC slightly lower at 20.52%.

GNOM

• 1D: 2.19%
• 1M: 16.88%
• YTD: 20.90%
• 6M: 16.82%
• 1Y: 66.61%
• 3Y*: 4.83%
• 5Y*: -10.28%
• 10Y*: —

LFSC

• 1D: 1.94%
• 1M: 14.28%
• YTD: 20.52%
• 6M: 12.35%
• 1Y: 78.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GNOM vs. LFSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GNOM Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF	20.90%	18.65%	-8.20%
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	20.52%	56.54%	-6.51%

Correlation

The correlation between GNOM and LFSC is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2024	0.77

The correlation between GNOM and LFSC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GNOM vs. LFSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNOM

GNOM Risk / Return Rank: 78
GNOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
GNOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
GNOM Omega Ratio Rank: 74
GNOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
GNOM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

LFSC

LFSC Risk / Return Rank: 88
LFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
LFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
LFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 87
LFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
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.

GNOM vs. LFSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) 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.

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.

	GNOM	LFSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.44	2.98	-0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	3.91	-0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.47	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.68	4.87	-1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.57	13.60	-3.02

GNOM vs. LFSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNOM Sharpe Ratio is 2.44, which is comparable to the LFSC Sharpe Ratio of 2.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNOM and LFSC, 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

GNOM vs. LFSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNOM drawdown since its inception was -75.00%, which is greater than LFSC's maximum drawdown of -29.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNOM and LFSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	GNOM	LFSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.00%	-29.74%	-45.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.17%	-16.25%	-1.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-44.24%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-72.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.04%	0.00%	-50.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-40.64%	-7.54%	-33.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.32%	5.81%	+0.51%

Volatility

GNOM vs. LFSC - Volatility Comparison

Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) has a higher volatility of 9.74% compared to F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) at 7.96%. This indicates that GNOM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LFSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GNOM	LFSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.74%	7.96%	+1.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.61%	18.82%	+1.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.40%	26.59%	+0.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.70%	28.88%	+4.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.18%	28.88%	+5.30%

GNOM vs. LFSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNOM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than LFSC's 0.54% expense ratio.

Dividends

GNOM vs. LFSC - Dividend Comparison

GNOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, while LFSC has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GNOM Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF	1.14%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%	0.14%
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GNOM and LFSC in my portfolio?

GNOM and LFSC have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GNOM or LFSC?

GNOM has higher volatility (9.74%) compared to LFSC (7.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNOM dropped -75.00% vs LFSC's -29.74%.

Which ETF is better, GNOM or LFSC?

On 1-year performance, LFSC leads with 78.76% vs 66.61% for GNOM. On fees, GNOM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, LFSC has been the lower-risk option at 7.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GNOM or LFSC?

Over the 1-year period, LFSC has performed better with a 78.76% return vs 66.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GNOM or LFSC?

GNOM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.54% for LFSC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GNOM or LFSC?

GNOM has the higher dividend yield at 1.14%, compared with 0.00% for LFSC.

What is the main difference between GNOM and LFSC?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for GNOM and 0.54% for LFSC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LFSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.98 vs 2.44), 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.