ICLN vs. LIT

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) and LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while LIT is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ICLN returned 8.55%/yr vs 12.66%/yr for LIT. Their 0.61 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ICLN charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LIT.

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.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ICLN having a 7.10% return and LIT slightly higher at 7.18%. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has underperformed LIT with an annualized return of 8.55%, while LIT has yielded a comparatively higher 12.66% annualized return.

ICLN

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: -10.78%
• 6M: -3.05%
• YTD: 7.10%
• 1Y: 31.07%
• 3Y*: 0.63%
• 5Y*: -3.76%
• 10Y*: 8.55%
• ALL TIME*: -3.93%

LIT

• 1D: -0.85%
• 1M: -9.55%
• 6M: -0.62%
• YTD: 7.18%
• 1Y: 70.85%
• 3Y*: 2.87%
• 5Y*: -2.82%
• 10Y*: 12.66%
• ALL TIME*: 6.36%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	$109.16M	$91.32M	$121.79M
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	$15.35M	$16.35M	$33.70M

ICLN vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	7.10%	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	7.18%	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 0.58, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.61
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	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 0.58 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

ICLN vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICLN	LIT
Utilities	40.9%	-
Technology	25.0%	20.0%
Industrials	22.6%	22.9%
Energy	8.3%	-
Basic Materials	1.7%	47.9%
Financial Services	0.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	9.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ICLN vs. LIT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 39
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 40
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 38

LIT

LIT Risk / Return Rank: 78
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 79
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 69

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

	ICLN	LIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.06	2.05	-0.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.55	2.61	-1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.33	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.13	2.62	-1.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.93	8.37	-4.44

ICLN vs. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 1.06, which is lower than the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLN	LIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.15%	-65.91%	-21.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.78%	-26.84%	-1.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-36.96%	-49.14%	+12.18%
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	-52.08%	-25.06%	-27.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.42%	-33.48%	-32.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.23%	8.40%	-0.17%

Volatility

ICLN vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a higher volatility of 10.74% compared to Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) at 9.34%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	ICLN	LIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.74%	9.34%	+1.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.25%	25.15%	+0.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.58%	34.47%	-3.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.04%	31.93%	-3.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.51%	30.80%	-3.29%

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 1.05%, more than LIT's 0.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.05%	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	0.73%	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

Can I hold both ICLN and LIT in my portfolio?

ICLN and LIT have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ICLN or LIT?

ICLN has higher volatility (10.74%) compared to LIT (9.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs LIT's -65.91%.

Which ETF is better, ICLN or LIT?

On 10-year performance, LIT leads with 12.66% vs 8.55% for ICLN. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, LIT has been the lower-risk option at 9.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ICLN or LIT?

Over the 10-year period, LIT has performed better with a 12.66% return vs 8.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICLN or LIT?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ICLN or LIT?

ICLN has the higher dividend yield at 1.05%, compared with 0.73% for LIT.

What is the main difference between ICLN and 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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.06), 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.