LCTU vs. CLOA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LCTU (BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF) and CLOA (BlackRock AAA CLO ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCTU is a ESG fund actively managed by BlackRock, while CLOA is a CLO fund actively managed by BlackRock. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, LCTU returned 21.17%/yr vs 6.74%/yr for CLOA. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LCTU charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CLOA.

Performance

LCTU vs. CLOA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) and BlackRock AAA CLO ETF (CLOA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCTU achieves a 9.04% return, which is significantly higher than CLOA's 2.06% return.

LCTU

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: 5.23%
• YTD: 9.04%
• 6M: 9.21%
• 1Y: 25.72%
• 3Y*: 21.17%
• 5Y*: 12.37%
• 10Y*: —

CLOA

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.44%
• YTD: 2.06%
• 6M: 2.51%
• 1Y: 5.28%
• 3Y*: 6.74%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LCTU vs. CLOA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LCTU BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF	9.04%	16.96%	24.00%	20.52%
CLOA BlackRock AAA CLO ETF	2.06%	5.44%	7.25%	8.38%

Correlation

The correlation between LCTU and CLOA is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 13, 2023	0.12

The correlation between LCTU and CLOA shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (all time) to 0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LCTU vs. CLOA — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCTU

LCTU Risk / Return Rank: 61
LCTU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
LCTU Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
LCTU Omega Ratio Rank: 62
LCTU Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
LCTU Martin Ratio Rank: 67

CLOA

CLOA Risk / Return Rank: 99
CLOA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
CLOA Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CLOA Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CLOA Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
CLOA Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

LCTU vs. CLOA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) and BlackRock AAA CLO ETF (CLOA). 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.

	LCTU	CLOA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	7.45	-5.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.89	13.98	-11.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	3.34	-1.96
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	30.02	-27.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.25	150.47	-138.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LCTU vs. CLOA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCTU Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is lower than the CLOA Sharpe Ratio of 7.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCTU and CLOA, 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

	LCTU	CLOA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10	7.45	-5.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.76	5.22	-4.46

Drawdowns

LCTU vs. CLOA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCTU drawdown since its inception was -25.93%, which is greater than CLOA's maximum drawdown of -1.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCTU and CLOA.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCTU	CLOA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.93%	-1.34%	-24.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.38%	-0.18%	-9.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.83%	-1.13%	-18.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.93%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.74%	0.00%	-0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.32%	-0.05%	-6.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.11%	0.04%	+2.07%

Volatility

LCTU vs. CLOA - Volatility Comparison

BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) has a higher volatility of 3.04% compared to BlackRock AAA CLO ETF (CLOA) at 0.15%. This indicates that LCTU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLOA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCTU	CLOA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.04%	0.15%	+2.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.36%	0.48%	+8.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.30%	0.71%	+11.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.15%	1.32%	+15.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.02%	1.32%	+15.70%

LCTU vs. CLOA - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCTU has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CLOA's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

LCTU vs. CLOA - Dividend Comparison

LCTU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.93%, less than CLOA's 4.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CLOA BlackRock AAA CLO ETF	4.96%	5.35%	6.01%	5.88%	0.00%	0.00%
LCTU BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF	0.93%	1.02%	1.27%	1.46%	1.63%	2.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCTU and CLOA in my portfolio?

LCTU and CLOA have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LCTU or CLOA?

LCTU has higher volatility (3.04%) compared to CLOA (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCTU dropped -25.93% vs CLOA's -1.34%.

Which ETF is better, LCTU or CLOA?

On 3-year performance, LCTU leads with 21.17% vs 6.74% for CLOA. On fees, LCTU is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, CLOA has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCTU or CLOA?

Over the 3-year period, LCTU has performed better with a 21.17% return vs 6.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCTU or CLOA?

LCTU is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for CLOA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LCTU or CLOA?

CLOA has the higher dividend yield at 4.96%, compared with 0.93% for LCTU.

What is the main difference between LCTU and CLOA?

LCTU is categorized as ESG, while CLOA is CLO. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LCTU and 0.20% for CLOA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLOA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.45 vs 2.10), 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.