LCDL vs. IBTG
LCDL (GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF) and IBTG (iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Treasury ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCDL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while IBTG is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Treasury Index. LCDL is actively managed, while IBTG is passively managed. Over the past year, LCDL returned -97.05% vs 4.12% for IBTG. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. LCDL charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IBTG.
Performance
LCDL vs. IBTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LCDL achieves a -82.24% return, which is significantly lower than IBTG's 1.51% return.
LCDL
- 1D
- -18.78%
- 1M
- -33.34%
- YTD
- -82.24%
- 6M
- -89.30%
- 1Y
- -97.05%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBTG
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.30%
- YTD
- 1.51%
- 6M
- 1.82%
- 1Y
- 4.12%
- 3Y*
- 4.12%
- 5Y*
- 0.86%
- 10Y*
- —
LCDL vs. IBTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LCDL GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF | -82.24% | -87.02% |
IBTG iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Treasury ETF | 1.51% | 2.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between LCDL and IBTG is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2025 | -0.04 |
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
LCDL vs. IBTG — Risk / Return Rank
LCDL
IBTG
LCDL vs. IBTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF (LCDL) and iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Treasury ETF (IBTG). 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.
| LCDL | IBTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -8.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -22.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.75 | 4.38 | -3.64 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.99 | 63.24 | -64.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.26 | 255.21 | -256.47 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LCDL | IBTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.64 | 8.04 | -8.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.26 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.65 | 0.29 | -0.94 |
Drawdowns
LCDL vs. IBTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LCDL drawdown since its inception was -98.50%, which is greater than IBTG's maximum drawdown of -13.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCDL and IBTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LCDL | IBTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -98.50% | -13.62% | -84.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -98.45% | -0.07% | -98.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.27% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -12.31% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -98.50% | 0.00% | -98.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -69.12% | -4.89% | -64.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 76.86% | 0.02% | +76.84% |
Volatility
LCDL vs. IBTG - Volatility Comparison
GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF (LCDL) has a higher volatility of 41.04% compared to iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Treasury ETF (IBTG) at 0.12%. This indicates that LCDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBTG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LCDL | IBTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 41.04% | 0.12% | +40.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 98.89% | 0.31% | +98.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 151.10% | 0.51% | +150.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 149.61% | 3.27% | +146.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 149.61% | 3.45% | +146.16% |
LCDL vs. IBTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
LCDL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than IBTG's 0.07% expense ratio.
Dividends
LCDL vs. IBTG - Dividend Comparison
LCDL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBTG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.96%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTG iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Treasury ETF | 3.96% | 4.03% | 4.08% | 3.61% | 2.06% | 0.66% | 0.53% |
LCDL GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LCDL and IBTG have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LCDL has higher volatility (41.04%) compared to IBTG (0.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCDL dropped -98.50% vs IBTG's -13.62%.
On 1-year performance, IBTG leads with 4.12% vs -97.05% for LCDL. On fees, IBTG is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, IBTG has been the lower-risk option at 0.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IBTG has performed better with a 4.12% return vs -97.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBTG is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for LCDL.
IBTG has the higher dividend yield at 3.96%, compared with 0.00% for LCDL.
LCDL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while IBTG is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for LCDL and 0.07% for IBTG.
IBTG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (8.04 vs -0.64), 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.
Find the right allocation for LCDL and IBTG
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