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 -19.29% vs 27.65% for GSG. At a correlation of -0.04, 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 -18.04% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 25.54% return.
LGHT
- 1D
- 1.48%
- 1M
- -0.49%
- YTD
- -18.04%
- 6M
- -18.59%
- 1Y
- -19.29%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- -1.03%
- 1M
- -12.93%
- YTD
- 25.54%
- 6M
- 23.88%
- 1Y
- 27.65%
- 3Y*
- 14.02%
- 5Y*
- 12.78%
- 10Y*
- 6.58%
LGHT vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LGHT Langar Global HealthTech ETF | -18.04% | -1.66% | 0.23% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 25.54% | 5.93% | 7.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between LGHT and GSG is -0.18, 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 | -0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 10, 2024 | -0.04 |
The correlation between LGHT and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to -0.04 (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 | -2.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | 1.23 | -0.39 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.76 | 1.66 | -2.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.60 | 6.95 | -8.55 |
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% | -16.74% | -8.83% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.74% | — |
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 | -26.31% | -62.10% | +35.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.95% | -63.69% | +55.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.10% | 4.01% | +8.09% |
Volatility
LGHT vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) has a higher volatility of 5.96% compared to iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) at 5.46%. This indicates that LGHT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSG based on this measure. 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 | 5.96% | 5.46% | +0.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.67% | 20.82% | -6.15% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.85% | 23.17% | -4.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.96% | 22.67% | -3.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.96% | 22.01% | -3.05% |
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 -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LGHT has higher volatility (5.96%) compared to GSG (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LGHT dropped -28.60% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 1-year performance, GSG leads with 27.65% vs -19.29% for LGHT. On fees, GSG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, GSG has been the lower-risk option at 5.46%. 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 27.65% return vs -19.29%. 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 (1.22 vs -1.03), 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