LCTU vs. EFIV
LCTU (BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF) and EFIV (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ESG ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCTU is a ESG fund actively managed by BlackRock, while EFIV is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 ESG Index. LCTU is actively managed, while EFIV is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LCTU returned 12.37%/yr vs 14.48%/yr for EFIV. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. LCTU charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for EFIV.
Performance
LCTU vs. EFIV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LCTU achieves a 9.04% return, which is significantly lower than EFIV's 9.91% return.
LCTU
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- 5.23%
- YTD
- 9.04%
- 6M
- 9.21%
- 1Y
- 25.72%
- 3Y*
- 21.17%
- 5Y*
- 12.37%
- 10Y*
- —
EFIV
- 1D
- -0.68%
- 1M
- 4.63%
- YTD
- 9.91%
- 6M
- 10.51%
- 1Y
- 30.49%
- 3Y*
- 21.82%
- 5Y*
- 14.48%
- 10Y*
- —
LCTU vs. EFIV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LCTU BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF | 9.04% | 16.96% | 24.00% | 25.38% | -20.02% | 17.49% |
EFIV State Street SPDR S&P 500 ESG ETF | 9.91% | 18.47% | 23.80% | 27.92% | -17.76% | 19.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between LCTU and EFIV is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 9, 2021 | 0.98 |
The correlation between LCTU and EFIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.
LCTU vs. EFIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LCTU
EFIV
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Real Estate
Utilities
Basic Materials
Technology
LCTU
EFIV
Financial Services
LCTU
EFIV
Communication Services
LCTU
EFIV
Consumer Cyclical
LCTU
EFIV
Healthcare
LCTU
EFIV
Industrials
LCTU
EFIV
Consumer Defensive
LCTU
EFIV
Energy
LCTU
EFIV
Real Estate
LCTU
EFIV
Utilities
LCTU
EFIV
Basic Materials
LCTU
EFIV
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
LCTU vs. EFIV — Risk / Return Rank
LCTU
EFIV
LCTU vs. EFIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ESG ETF (EFIV). 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 | EFIV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.50 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.47 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.75 | 3.24 | -0.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.25 | 15.02 | -2.77 |
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
| LCTU | EFIV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.10 | 2.60 | -0.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 | 0.86 | -0.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.76 | 1.06 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
LCTU vs. EFIV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LCTU drawdown since its inception was -25.93%, which is greater than EFIV's maximum drawdown of -24.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCTU and EFIV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LCTU | EFIV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.93% | -24.52% | -1.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.38% | -9.44% | +0.06% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.83% | -19.23% | -0.60% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.93% | -24.52% | -1.41% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.74% | -1.02% | +0.28% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.32% | -4.81% | -1.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.11% | 2.04% | +0.07% |
Volatility
LCTU vs. EFIV - Volatility Comparison
BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ESG ETF (EFIV) have volatilities of 3.04% and 3.14%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LCTU | EFIV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.04% | 3.14% | -0.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.36% | 9.00% | +0.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.30% | 11.79% | +0.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.15% | 16.92% | +0.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.02% | 16.83% | +0.19% |
LCTU vs. EFIV - Expense Ratio Comparison
LCTU has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than EFIV's 0.10% expense ratio. However, 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. EFIV - Dividend Comparison
LCTU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.93%, less than EFIV's 0.94% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFIV State Street SPDR S&P 500 ESG ETF | 0.94% | 1.03% | 1.20% | 1.37% | 1.64% | 1.19% | 0.65% |
LCTU BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF | 0.93% | 1.02% | 1.27% | 1.46% | 1.63% | 2.20% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, LCTU and EFIV move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
EFIV has higher volatility (3.14%) compared to LCTU (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCTU dropped -25.93% vs EFIV's -24.52%.
On 5-year performance, EFIV leads with 14.48% vs 12.37% for LCTU. On fees, EFIV is cheaper at 0.10% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, EFIV has performed better with a 14.48% return vs 12.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EFIV is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for LCTU.
EFIV has the higher dividend yield at 0.94%, compared with 0.93% for LCTU.
LCTU is categorized as ESG, while EFIV is S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: BlackRock and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LCTU and 0.10% for EFIV.
EFIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 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.
Find the right allocation for LCTU and EFIV
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