LENS vs. FLRT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LENS (Sarmaya Thematic ETF) and FLRT (Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LENS is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Sarmaya Partners, while FLRT is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by Pacific Life. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LENS returned 61.82% vs 6.08% for FLRT. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. LENS charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for FLRT.

Performance

LENS vs. FLRT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) and Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LENS achieves a 13.33% return, which is significantly higher than FLRT's 1.83% return.

LENS

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -1.68%
• YTD: 13.33%
• 6M: 18.33%
• 1Y: 61.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLRT

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.90%
• YTD: 1.83%
• 6M: 2.55%
• 1Y: 6.08%
• 3Y*: 8.90%
• 5Y*: 5.98%
• 10Y*: 5.00%

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

LENS vs. FLRT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	13.33%	56.21%
FLRT Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF	1.83%	5.63%

Correlation

The correlation between LENS and FLRT is -0.01, 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	-0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025	-0.00

Return for Risk

LENS vs. FLRT — Risk / Return Rank

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

LENS

LENS Risk / Return Rank: 67
LENS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
LENS Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
LENS Omega Ratio Rank: 68
LENS Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
LENS Martin Ratio Rank: 58

FLRT

FLRT Risk / Return Rank: 85
FLRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
FLRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
FLRT Omega Ratio Rank: 97
FLRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
FLRT Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

LENS vs. FLRT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) and Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT). 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.

	LENS	FLRT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	3.89	-1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	6.03	-3.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.95	-0.54
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.02	3.43	+0.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.02	12.62	-2.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LENS vs. FLRT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LENS Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is lower than the FLRT Sharpe Ratio of 3.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LENS and FLRT, 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

	LENS	FLRT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.34	3.89	-1.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	2.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.81	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.09	0.75	+1.34

Drawdowns

LENS vs. FLRT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LENS drawdown since its inception was -15.47%, smaller than the maximum FLRT drawdown of -20.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LENS and FLRT.

Drawdown Indicators

	LENS	FLRT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.47%	-20.96%	+5.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.47%	-1.78%	-13.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-2.87%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-7.60%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-20.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.64%	-0.15%	-13.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.71%	-1.41%	-2.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.19%	0.48%	+5.71%

Volatility

LENS vs. FLRT - Volatility Comparison

Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) has a higher volatility of 6.16% compared to Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT) at 0.40%. This indicates that LENS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLRT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LENS	FLRT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.16%	0.40%	+5.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.07%	1.19%	+20.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.54%	1.57%	+24.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.49%	2.30%	+23.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.49%	6.17%	+19.32%

LENS vs. FLRT - Expense Ratio Comparison

LENS has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than FLRT's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

LENS vs. FLRT - Dividend Comparison

LENS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, less than FLRT's 6.81% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLRT Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF	6.81%	6.93%	7.93%	8.40%	5.81%	3.16%	3.52%	4.30%	3.95%	3.20%	3.38%	3.21%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	1.41%	1.60%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LENS and FLRT in my portfolio?

LENS and FLRT have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LENS or FLRT?

LENS has higher volatility (6.16%) compared to FLRT (0.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LENS dropped -15.47% vs FLRT's -20.96%.

Which ETF is better, LENS or FLRT?

On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 61.82% vs 6.08% for FLRT. On fees, FLRT is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, FLRT has been the lower-risk option at 0.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LENS or FLRT?

Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 61.82% return vs 6.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LENS or FLRT?

FLRT is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LENS or FLRT?

FLRT has the higher dividend yield at 6.81%, compared with 1.41% for LENS.

What is the main difference between LENS and FLRT?

LENS is categorized as Global Equities, while FLRT is High Yield Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Sarmaya Partners and Pacific Life. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for LENS and 0.69% for FLRT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLRT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.89 vs 2.34), 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.