LCDL vs. SHV
LCDL (GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF) and SHV (iShares 0-1 Year Treasury Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCDL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while SHV is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE Short US Treasury Securities Index. LCDL is actively managed, while SHV is passively managed. Over the past year, LCDL returned -97.05% vs 3.90% for SHV. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. LCDL charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for SHV.
Performance
LCDL vs. SHV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LCDL achieves a -82.24% return, which is significantly lower than SHV's 1.46% return.
LCDL
- 1D
- -18.78%
- 1M
- -33.34%
- YTD
- -82.24%
- 6M
- -89.30%
- 1Y
- -97.05%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SHV
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.29%
- YTD
- 1.46%
- 6M
- 1.74%
- 1Y
- 3.90%
- 3Y*
- 4.65%
- 5Y*
- 3.32%
- 10Y*
- 2.23%
LCDL vs. SHV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LCDL GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF | -82.24% | -87.02% |
SHV iShares 0-1 Year Treasury Bond ETF | 1.46% | 2.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between LCDL and SHV is -0.04, 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 | -0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2025 | -0.05 |
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. SHV — Risk / Return Rank
LCDL
SHV
LCDL vs. SHV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF (LCDL) and iShares 0-1 Year Treasury Bond ETF (SHV). 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 | SHV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -20.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -151.98 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.75 | 53.77 | -53.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.99 | 431.38 | -432.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.26 | 2,419.80 | -2,421.06 |
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 | SHV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.64 | 19.49 | -20.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 11.57 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 8.09 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.65 | 4.50 | -5.15 |
Drawdowns
LCDL vs. SHV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LCDL drawdown since its inception was -98.50%, which is greater than SHV's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCDL and SHV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LCDL | SHV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -98.50% | -0.45% | -98.05% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -98.45% | -0.01% | -98.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.03% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -0.40% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -0.45% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -98.50% | 0.00% | -98.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -69.12% | -0.03% | -69.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 76.86% | 0.00% | +76.86% |
Volatility
LCDL vs. SHV - Volatility Comparison
GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF (LCDL) has a higher volatility of 41.04% compared to iShares 0-1 Year Treasury Bond ETF (SHV) at 0.05%. This indicates that LCDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SHV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LCDL | SHV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 41.04% | 0.05% | +40.99% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 98.89% | 0.12% | +98.77% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 151.10% | 0.20% | +150.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 149.61% | 0.29% | +149.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 149.61% | 0.28% | +149.33% |
LCDL vs. SHV - Expense Ratio Comparison
LCDL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than SHV's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
LCDL vs. SHV - Dividend Comparison
LCDL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SHV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.83%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LCDL GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SHV iShares 0-1 Year Treasury Bond ETF | 3.83% | 4.09% | 5.02% | 4.73% | 1.39% | 0.00% | 0.74% | 2.19% | 1.66% | 0.72% | 0.34% | 0.03% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LCDL and SHV have a correlation of -0.04, 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 SHV (0.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCDL dropped -98.50% vs SHV's -0.45%.
On 1-year performance, SHV leads with 3.90% vs -97.05% for LCDL. On fees, SHV is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, SHV has been the lower-risk option at 0.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, SHV has performed better with a 3.90% return vs -97.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SHV is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for LCDL.
SHV has the higher dividend yield at 3.83%, compared with 0.00% for LCDL.
LCDL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while SHV is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for LCDL and 0.15% for SHV.
SHV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (19.49 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 SHV
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