KLMT vs. LENS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KLMT (Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF) and LENS (Sarmaya Thematic ETF) are both Global Equities funds. KLMT is passively managed, while LENS is actively managed. Over the past year, KLMT returned 27.86% vs 61.82% for LENS. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. KLMT charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for LENS.

Performance

KLMT vs. LENS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) 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, KLMT achieves a 12.04% return, which is significantly lower than LENS's 13.33% return.

KLMT

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: 5.23%
• YTD: 12.04%
• 6M: 12.88%
• 1Y: 27.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LENS

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -1.68%
• YTD: 13.33%
• 6M: 18.33%
• 1Y: 61.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

KLMT vs. LENS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	12.04%	17.36%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	13.33%	56.21%

Correlation

The correlation between KLMT and LENS is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025	0.38

Return for Risk

KLMT vs. LENS — Risk / Return Rank

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

KLMT

KLMT Risk / Return Rank: 67
KLMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
KLMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
KLMT Omega Ratio Rank: 67
KLMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
KLMT Martin Ratio Rank: 70

LENS

LENS Risk / Return Rank: 67
LENS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
LENS Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
LENS Omega Ratio Rank: 68
LENS Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
LENS Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

KLMT vs. LENS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) 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.

	KLMT	LENS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.22	2.34	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.10	2.70	+0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.41	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	4.02	-1.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.75	10.02	+2.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KLMT vs. LENS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KLMT Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is comparable to the LENS Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KLMT 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KLMT	LENS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.22	2.34	-0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.28	2.09	-0.81

Drawdowns

KLMT vs. LENS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KLMT drawdown since its inception was -16.87%, which is greater than LENS's maximum drawdown of -15.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KLMT and LENS.

Drawdown Indicators

	KLMT	LENS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.87%	-15.47%	-1.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.54%	-15.47%	+5.93%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.78%	-13.64%	+12.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.91%	-3.71%	+1.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.19%	6.19%	-4.00%

Volatility

KLMT vs. LENS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) is 3.76%, while Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) has a volatility of 6.16%. This indicates that KLMT 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

	KLMT	LENS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.76%	6.16%	-2.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.07%	22.07%	-12.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.61%	26.54%	-13.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.85%	25.49%	-9.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.85%	25.49%	-9.64%

KLMT vs. LENS - Expense Ratio Comparison

KLMT has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than LENS's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

KLMT vs. LENS - Dividend Comparison

KLMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, more than LENS's 1.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	1.75%	1.95%	0.85%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	1.41%	1.60%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KLMT and LENS in my portfolio?

KLMT and LENS have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KLMT or LENS?

LENS has higher volatility (6.16%) compared to KLMT (3.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KLMT dropped -16.87% vs LENS's -15.47%.

Which ETF is better, KLMT or LENS?

On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 61.82% vs 27.86% for KLMT. On fees, KLMT is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, KLMT has been the lower-risk option at 3.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KLMT or LENS?

Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 61.82% return vs 27.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KLMT or LENS?

KLMT is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.

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

KLMT has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 1.41% for LENS.

What is the main difference between KLMT and LENS?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Sarmaya Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for KLMT and 0.79% for LENS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LENS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 2.22), 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.