PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ICLN vs. LIT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ICLN vs. LIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICLN achieves a 26.14% return, which is significantly higher than LIT's 20.92% return. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has underperformed LIT with an annualized return of 11.38%, while LIT has yielded a comparatively higher 14.22% annualized return.


ICLN

1D
-4.44%
1M
-7.52%
YTD
26.14%
6M
25.31%
1Y
64.46%
3Y*
6.74%
5Y*
-0.79%
10Y*
11.38%

LIT

1D
-5.01%
1M
-8.03%
YTD
20.92%
6M
17.98%
1Y
114.29%
3Y*
8.82%
5Y*
3.06%
10Y*
14.22%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ICLN vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ICLN
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
26.14%47.05%-25.72%-20.41%-5.43%-24.18%141.82%44.36%-9.03%21.47%
LIT
Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF
20.92%60.05%-19.19%-12.18%-29.91%36.74%127.88%3.27%-28.63%64.19%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and LIT is 0.53, 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

0.53

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.58

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.60

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2010

0.61

The correlation between ICLN and LIT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

ICLN vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ICLN
LIT

Utilities

34.6%

-

Industrials

28.7%
25.0%

Energy

23.7%

-

Technology

10.5%
16.0%

Basic Materials

1.3%
49.9%

Consumer Cyclical

0.1%
9.1%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

ICLN
34.6%
LIT

-

Industrials

ICLN
28.7%
LIT
25.0%

Energy

ICLN
23.7%
LIT

-

Technology

ICLN
10.5%
LIT
16.0%

Basic Materials

ICLN
1.3%
LIT
49.9%

Consumer Cyclical

ICLN
0.1%
LIT
9.1%

Communication Services

ICLN

-

LIT

-

Consumer Defensive

ICLN

-

LIT

-

Financial Services

ICLN

-

LIT

-

Healthcare

ICLN

-

LIT

-

Real Estate

ICLN

-

LIT

-

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

ICLN vs. LIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICLN
ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

LIT
LIT Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ICLN vs. LIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). 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.


ICLNLITDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.89

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.49

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.96

6.98

-3.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.73

24.36

-10.63

ICLN vs. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is lower than the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 3.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN and LIT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ICLN vs. LIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, which is greater than LIT's maximum drawdown of -65.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and LIT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ICLNLITDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-87.15%

-65.91%

-21.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.38%

-16.46%

+0.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-43.18%

-53.01%

+9.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-57.16%

-65.91%

+8.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-66.75%

-65.91%

-0.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-43.56%

-15.46%

-28.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-66.53%

-33.56%

-32.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.71%

4.71%

0.00%

Volatility

ICLN vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a higher volatility of 13.47% compared to Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) at 11.76%. This indicates that ICLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ICLNLITDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.47%

11.76%

+1.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.14%

24.39%

-1.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.52%

34.30%

-5.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.69%

32.09%

-4.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.33%

30.75%

-3.42%

ICLN vs. LIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than LIT's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

ICLN vs. LIT - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, more than LIT's 0.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ICLN
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
0.89%1.63%1.85%1.59%0.89%1.18%0.34%1.36%2.77%2.49%3.88%2.36%
LIT
Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF
0.40%0.49%0.93%1.11%0.99%0.22%0.40%1.85%2.52%3.26%2.15%0.24%

Frequently Asked Questions


ICLN and LIT have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ICLN has higher volatility (13.47%) compared to LIT (11.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs LIT's -65.91%.

On 10-year performance, LIT leads with 14.22% vs 11.38% for ICLN. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, LIT has been the lower-risk option at 11.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, LIT has performed better with a 14.22% return vs 11.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ICLN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.

ICLN has the higher dividend yield at 0.89%, compared with 0.40% for LIT.

ICLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while LIT is Lithium & Battery Metals. ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ICLN and 0.75% for LIT.

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.35 vs 2.27), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ICLN and LIT

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