PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LCTU vs. SUSC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LCTU vs. SUSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) and iShares ESG Aware USD Corporate Bond ETF (SUSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCTU achieves a 9.23% return, which is significantly higher than SUSC's 0.72% return.


LCTU

1D
1.73%
1M
2.67%
YTD
9.23%
6M
9.49%
1Y
25.98%
3Y*
19.96%
5Y*
12.39%
10Y*

SUSC

1D
0.03%
1M
1.23%
YTD
0.72%
6M
1.11%
1Y
5.58%
3Y*
5.11%
5Y*
0.31%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LCTU vs. SUSC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
LCTU
BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF
9.23%16.96%24.00%25.38%-20.02%17.74%
SUSC
iShares ESG Aware USD Corporate Bond ETF
0.72%7.57%1.91%8.58%-15.95%2.63%

Correlation

The correlation between LCTU and SUSC is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.41

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.33

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2021

0.30

The correlation between LCTU and SUSC shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (5 years) to 0.41 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. SUSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCTU
LCTU Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
LCTU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCTU Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCTU Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
LCTU Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCTU Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank

SUSC
SUSC Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
SUSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SUSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
SUSC Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
SUSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
SUSC Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank
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. SUSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) and iShares ESG Aware USD Corporate Bond ETF (SUSC). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


LCTUSUSCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.23

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.78

1.95

+0.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.10

5.94

+6.16

LCTU vs. SUSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCTU Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is higher than the SUSC Sharpe Ratio of 1.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCTU and SUSC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

LCTU vs. SUSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCTU drawdown since its inception was -25.93%, which is greater than SUSC's maximum drawdown of -22.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCTU and SUSC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LCTUSUSCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.93%

-22.42%

-3.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.38%

-2.87%

-6.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.83%

-6.57%

-13.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.93%

-22.42%

-3.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.57%

-1.11%

+0.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.29%

-5.87%

-0.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.15%

0.94%

+1.21%

Volatility

LCTU vs. SUSC - Volatility Comparison

BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) has a higher volatility of 4.49% compared to iShares ESG Aware USD Corporate Bond ETF (SUSC) at 1.46%. This indicates that LCTU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SUSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LCTUSUSCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.49%

1.46%

+3.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.05%

3.30%

+6.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.76%

4.36%

+8.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.23%

7.19%

+10.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.04%

7.62%

+9.42%

LCTU vs. SUSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCTU has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than SUSC's 0.18% 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. SUSC - Dividend Comparison

LCTU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, less than SUSC's 4.48% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
LCTU
BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF
1.15%1.02%1.27%1.46%1.63%2.20%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SUSC
iShares ESG Aware USD Corporate Bond ETF
4.48%4.37%4.34%3.83%2.97%2.21%2.19%3.07%3.33%1.33%

Frequently Asked Questions


LCTU and SUSC have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LCTU has higher volatility (4.49%) compared to SUSC (1.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCTU dropped -25.93% vs SUSC's -22.42%.

On 5-year performance, LCTU leads with 12.39% vs 0.31% for SUSC. On fees, LCTU is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, SUSC has been the lower-risk option at 1.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, LCTU has performed better with a 12.39% return vs 0.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LCTU is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for SUSC.

SUSC has the higher dividend yield at 4.48%, compared with 1.15% for LCTU.

LCTU is categorized as ESG, while SUSC is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: BlackRock and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LCTU and 0.18% for SUSC.

LCTU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.29), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LCTU and SUSC

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