LFSC vs. GSG
LFSC (F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - LFSC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by F/m, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. LFSC is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past year, LFSC returned 88.87% vs 37.47% for GSG. Their -0.09 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. LFSC charges 0.54%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
LFSC vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LFSC achieves a 29.56% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 32.52% return.
LFSC
- 1D
- 0.78%
- 1M
- 2.27%
- 6M
- 33.88%
- YTD
- 29.56%
- 1Y
- 88.87%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 43.82%
GSG
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- 5.78%
- 6M
- 21.95%
- YTD
- 32.52%
- 1Y
- 37.47%
- 3Y*
- 12.51%
- 5Y*
- 14.20%
- 10Y*
- 8.03%
- ALL TIME*
- -2.36%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $18.96M | $16.42M | $22.87M | |
| $177.99K | $291.81K | $193.93K |
LFSC vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF | 29.56% | 56.54% | -6.51% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 32.52% | 5.93% | 3.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between LFSC and GSG is -0.22, 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. | -0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2024 | -0.09 |
The correlation between LFSC and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to -0.09 (all time), 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
LFSC vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
LFSC
GSG
LFSC vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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 | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.73 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | 1.27 | +0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.50 | 2.00 | +3.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.48 | 6.32 | +9.16 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LFSC vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFSC drawdown since its inception was -29.74%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFSC and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFSC | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.74% | -89.62% | +59.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.25% | -18.81% | +2.56% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.81% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -59.99% | +59.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.22% | -63.67% | +56.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.76% | 5.94% | -0.18% |
Volatility
LFSC vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) have volatilities of 9.41% and 8.99%, 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
| LFSC | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.41% | 8.99% | +0.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.97% | 21.89% | -1.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.35% | 24.44% | +2.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.88% | 22.90% | +5.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.88% | 22.08% | +6.80% |
LFSC vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
LFSC has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
LFSC vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
Neither LFSC nor GSG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
LFSC and GSG have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LFSC has higher volatility (9.41%) compared to GSG (8.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFSC dropped -29.74% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 1-year performance, LFSC leads with 88.87% vs 37.47% for GSG. On fees, LFSC is cheaper at 0.54% per year. On volatility, GSG has been the lower-risk option at 8.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LFSC has performed better with a 88.87% return vs 37.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LFSC is cheaper with a 0.54% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
LFSC and GSG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
LFSC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: F/m and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for LFSC and 0.75% for GSG.
LFSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.27 vs 1.54), 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 LFSC and GSG
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