LFSC vs. BITI

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

LFSC (F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF) and BITI (ProShares Short Bitcoin ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LFSC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by F/m, while BITI is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Bloomberg Bitcoin Index. LFSC is actively managed, while BITI is passively managed. Over the past year, LFSC returned 86.46% vs 58.64% for BITI. Their -0.32 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. LFSC charges 0.54%/yr vs 1.03%/yr for BITI.

Performance

LFSC vs. BITI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and ProShares Short Bitcoin ETF (BITI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LFSC achieves a 24.40% return, which is significantly lower than BITI's 27.11% return.

LFSC

• 1D: -2.42%
• 1M: -1.28%
• 6M: 27.81%
• YTD: 24.40%
• 1Y: 86.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 40.92%

BITI

• 1D: 3.01%
• 1M: -2.58%
• 6M: 22.77%
• YTD: 27.11%
• 1Y: 58.64%
• 3Y*: -31.77%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -35.65%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BITI ProShares Short Bitcoin ETF	$24.10M	$26.49M	$38.71M
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	$207.45K	$324.22K	$187.45K

LFSC vs. BITI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	24.40%	56.54%	-6.51%
BITI ProShares Short Bitcoin ETF	27.11%	-1.76%	-25.99%

Correlation

The correlation between LFSC and BITI is -0.32, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2024	-0.32

Return for Risk

LFSC vs. BITI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

LFSC

LFSC Risk / Return Rank: 94
LFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
LFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
LFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 94
LFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
LFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 91

BITI

BITI Risk / Return Rank: 61
BITI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
BITI Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
BITI Omega Ratio Rank: 55
BITI Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
BITI Martin Ratio Rank: 53

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

LFSC vs. BITI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and ProShares Short Bitcoin ETF (BITI). 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.

	LFSC	BITI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.25	1.45	+1.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.10	2.02	+2.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.24	+0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.45	2.53	+2.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.35	6.17	+9.17

LFSC vs. BITI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LFSC Sharpe Ratio is 3.25, which is higher than the BITI Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LFSC and BITI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

LFSC vs. BITI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LFSC drawdown since its inception was -29.74%, smaller than the maximum BITI drawdown of -92.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFSC and BITI.

Drawdown Indicators

	LFSC	BITI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.74%	-92.16%	+62.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.25%	-25.28%	+9.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-84.63%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.85%	-86.12%	+82.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.26%	-68.59%	+61.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.76%	10.35%	-4.59%

Volatility

LFSC vs. BITI - Volatility Comparison

F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and ProShares Short Bitcoin ETF (BITI) have volatilities of 9.04% and 9.13%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	LFSC	BITI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.04%	9.13%	-0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.86%	33.31%	-13.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.28%	44.23%	-16.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.89%	52.03%	-23.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.89%	52.03%	-23.14%

LFSC vs. BITI - Expense Ratio Comparison

LFSC has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is lower than BITI's 1.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

LFSC vs. BITI - Dividend Comparison

LFSC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BITI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.30%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BITI ProShares Short Bitcoin ETF	15.17%	1.60%	3.91%	3.33%	0.06%
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LFSC and BITI in my portfolio?

LFSC and BITI have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LFSC or BITI?

BITI has higher volatility (9.13%) compared to LFSC (9.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFSC dropped -29.74% vs BITI's -92.16%.

Which ETF is better, LFSC or BITI?

On 1-year performance, LFSC leads with 86.46% vs 58.64% for BITI. On fees, LFSC is cheaper at 0.54% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LFSC or BITI?

Over the 1-year period, LFSC has performed better with a 86.46% return vs 58.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LFSC or BITI?

LFSC is cheaper with a 0.54% expense ratio, compared with 1.03% for BITI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LFSC or BITI?

BITI has the higher dividend yield at 15.17%, compared with 0.00% for LFSC.

What is the main difference between LFSC and BITI?

LFSC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while BITI is Cryptocurrency. They also come from different issuers: F/m and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for LFSC and 1.03% for BITI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LFSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.25 vs 1.45), 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.