ION vs. XRH0.L

Last updated Jul 1, 2026

ION (Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF) and XRH0.L (Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - ION is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the S&P Global Core Battery Metals Index - Benchmark TR Net, while XRH0.L is a Metals fund tracking the Rhodium. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ION returned 13.08%/yr vs 18.05%/yr for XRH0.L. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ION charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for XRH0.L.

Performance

ION vs. XRH0.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION) and Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC (XRH0.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ION achieves a -1.19% return, which is significantly higher than XRH0.L's -28.17% return.

ION

• 1D: 1.88%
• 1M: -15.33%
• YTD: -1.19%
• 6M: -1.36%
• 1Y: 78.17%
• 3Y*: 13.08%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XRH0.L

• 1D: 1.54%
• 1M: -10.60%
• YTD: -28.17%
• 6M: -23.84%
• 1Y: 40.60%
• 3Y*: 18.05%
• 5Y*: -15.19%
• 10Y*: 27.32%

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

ION vs. XRH0.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
ION Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF	-1.19%	108.37%	-20.02%	-14.10%	-8.45%
XRH0.L Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC	-28.17%	205.23%	-14.69%	-60.81%	-3.23%

Correlation

The correlation between ION and XRH0.L is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2022	0.08

The correlation between ION and XRH0.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.08 (all time) to 0.18 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ION vs. XRH0.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ION

ION Risk / Return Rank: 64
ION Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
ION Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
ION Omega Ratio Rank: 58
ION Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
ION Martin Ratio Rank: 60

XRH0.L

XRH0.L Risk / Return Rank: 22
XRH0.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
XRH0.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
XRH0.L Omega Ratio Rank: 27
XRH0.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
XRH0.L Martin Ratio Rank: 19

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.

ION vs. XRH0.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION) and Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC (XRH0.L). 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.

	ION	XRH0.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.99	0.45	+1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.42	1.33	+1.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.17	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	1.00	+1.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.15	1.91	+7.25

ION vs. XRH0.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ION Sharpe Ratio is 1.99, which is higher than the XRH0.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ION and XRH0.L, 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

ION vs. XRH0.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ION drawdown since its inception was -52.08%, smaller than the maximum XRH0.L drawdown of -85.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ION and XRH0.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ION	XRH0.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.08%	-85.90%	+33.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.85%	-40.30%	+13.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-46.47%	-46.87%	+0.40%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-81.27%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-85.90%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.47%	-67.56%	+42.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.60%	-50.59%	+26.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.57%	21.21%	-12.64%

Volatility

ION vs. XRH0.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION) is 13.79%, while Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC (XRH0.L) has a volatility of 28.09%. This indicates that ION experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XRH0.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ION	XRH0.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.79%	28.09%	-14.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.01%	70.45%	-38.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.57%	89.78%	-50.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.57%	69.02%	-37.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.57%	66.84%	-35.27%

ION vs. XRH0.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ION has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than XRH0.L's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

ION vs. XRH0.L - Dividend Comparison

ION's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, while XRH0.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
ION Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF	1.50%	1.63%	1.74%	2.23%	0.13%
XRH0.L Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ION and XRH0.L in my portfolio?

ION and XRH0.L have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ION or XRH0.L?

On fees, ION is cheaper at 0.58% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ION or XRH0.L?

ION is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XRH0.L.

What is the main difference between ION and XRH0.L?

ION is categorized as Lithium & Battery Metals, while XRH0.L is Metals. ION tracks S&P Global Core Battery Metals Index - Benchmark TR Net, while XRH0.L tracks Rhodium. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for ION and 0.95% for XRH0.L.