LGHT vs. GSG
LGHT (Langar Global HealthTech ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - LGHT is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by Langar, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. LGHT is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past year, LGHT returned -14.70% vs 34.57% for GSG. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. LGHT charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
LGHT vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LGHT achieves a -12.10% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 32.35% return.
LGHT
- 1D
- 0.75%
- 1M
- 6.99%
- 6M
- -15.54%
- YTD
- -12.10%
- 1Y
- -14.70%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- 3.60%
- 1M
- -0.20%
- 6M
- 28.24%
- YTD
- 32.35%
- 1Y
- 34.57%
- 3Y*
- 14.41%
- 5Y*
- 13.83%
- 10Y*
- 7.40%
LGHT vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LGHT Langar Global HealthTech ETF | -12.10% | -1.66% | 0.23% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 32.35% | 5.93% | 7.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between LGHT and GSG is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.19 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 10, 2024 | -0.05 |
The correlation between LGHT and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to -0.05 (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
LGHT vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
LGHT
GSG
LGHT vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) 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.
| LGHT | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.89 | 1.27 | -0.38 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.58 | 1.85 | -2.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.15 | 6.29 | -7.44 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LGHT vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LGHT drawdown since its inception was -28.60%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGHT and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LGHT | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.60% | -89.62% | +61.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.57% | -18.81% | -6.76% |
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 | -20.97% | -60.04% | +39.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.23% | -63.69% | +55.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.79% | 5.51% | +7.28% |
Volatility
LGHT vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) have volatilities of 7.20% and 7.35%, 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
| LGHT | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.20% | 7.35% | -0.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.55% | 21.50% | -5.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.67% | 23.48% | -3.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.21% | 22.80% | -3.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.21% | 22.00% | -2.79% |
LGHT vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
LGHT has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
LGHT vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
Neither LGHT nor GSG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
LGHT and GSG have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (7.35%) compared to LGHT (7.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LGHT dropped -28.60% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 1-year performance, GSG leads with 34.57% vs -14.70% for LGHT. On fees, GSG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, LGHT has been the lower-risk option at 7.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GSG has performed better with a 34.57% return vs -14.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for LGHT.
LGHT and GSG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
LGHT is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Langar and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for LGHT and 0.75% for GSG.
GSG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs -0.75), 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 LGHT 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