LGCF vs. NATO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LGCF (Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF) and NATO (Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LGCF is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Solactive US Cash Flow Champions Index, while NATO is a Aerospace & Defense fund tracking the Solactive Transatlantic Aerospace and Defense Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, LGCF returned 16.43% vs 17.37% for NATO. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LGCF charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for NATO.

Performance

LGCF vs. NATO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF (LGCF) and Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF (NATO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with LGCF having a 4.82% return and NATO slightly lower at 4.58%.

LGCF

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 0.05%
• YTD: 4.82%
• 6M: 3.86%
• 1Y: 16.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NATO

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 1.72%
• YTD: 4.58%
• 6M: 4.25%
• 1Y: 17.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LGCF vs. NATO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LGCF Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF	4.82%	15.71%	-1.03%
NATO Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF	4.58%	50.95%	0.51%

Correlation

The correlation between LGCF and NATO is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2024	0.42

Return for Risk

LGCF vs. NATO — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGCF

LGCF Risk / Return Rank: 47
LGCF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
LGCF Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
LGCF Omega Ratio Rank: 39
LGCF Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
LGCF Martin Ratio Rank: 54

NATO

NATO Risk / Return Rank: 23
NATO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
NATO Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
NATO Omega Ratio Rank: 23
NATO Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
NATO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

LGCF vs. NATO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF (LGCF) and Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF (NATO). 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.

	LGCF	NATO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	0.81	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.82	1.31	+0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.15	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.87	1.09	+1.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.60	2.65	+5.95

LGCF vs. NATO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGCF Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is higher than the NATO Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGCF and NATO, 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

LGCF vs. NATO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGCF drawdown since its inception was -16.67%, roughly equal to the maximum NATO drawdown of -15.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGCF and NATO.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGCF	NATO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.67%	-15.99%	-0.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.75%	-15.99%	+10.24%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.75%	-9.55%	+8.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.20%	-3.89%	+1.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.91%	6.57%	-4.66%

Volatility

LGCF vs. NATO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF (LGCF) is 3.06%, while Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF (NATO) has a volatility of 7.57%. This indicates that LGCF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NATO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LGCF	NATO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.06%	7.57%	-4.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.11%	18.35%	-8.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.86%	21.46%	-8.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.09%	22.72%	-7.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.09%	22.72%	-7.63%

LGCF vs. NATO - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGCF has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than NATO's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

LGCF vs. NATO - Dividend Comparison

LGCF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, more than NATO's 0.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
LGCF Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF	1.75%	1.84%	1.19%
NATO Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF	0.43%	0.45%	0.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LGCF and NATO in my portfolio?

LGCF and NATO have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LGCF or NATO?

NATO has higher volatility (7.57%) compared to LGCF (3.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LGCF dropped -16.67% vs NATO's -15.99%.

Which ETF is better, LGCF or NATO?

On 1-year performance, NATO leads with 17.37% vs 16.43% for LGCF. On fees, LGCF is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, LGCF has been the lower-risk option at 3.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LGCF or NATO?

Over the 1-year period, NATO has performed better with a 17.37% return vs 16.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LGCF or NATO?

LGCF is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for NATO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LGCF or NATO?

LGCF has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 0.43% for NATO.

What is the main difference between LGCF and NATO?

LGCF is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while NATO is Aerospace & Defense. LGCF tracks Solactive US Cash Flow Champions Index, while NATO tracks Solactive Transatlantic Aerospace and Defense Index. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for LGCF and 0.35% for NATO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LGCF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.28 vs 0.81), 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.