LGHT vs. GSKH
LGHT (Langar Global HealthTech ETF) and GSKH (GSK plc ADRhedged ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. LGHT is actively managed, while GSKH is passively managed. Over the past year, LGHT returned -19.29% vs 42.66% for GSKH. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LGHT charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for GSKH.
Performance
LGHT vs. GSKH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LGHT achieves a -18.04% return, which is significantly lower than GSKH's 9.90% return.
LGHT
- 1D
- 1.48%
- 1M
- -0.49%
- YTD
- -18.04%
- 6M
- -18.59%
- 1Y
- -19.29%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSKH
- 1D
- 2.87%
- 1M
- 2.94%
- YTD
- 9.90%
- 6M
- 10.56%
- 1Y
- 42.66%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LGHT vs. GSKH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LGHT Langar Global HealthTech ETF | -18.04% | -4.60% |
GSKH GSK plc ADRhedged ETF | 9.90% | 36.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between LGHT and GSKH is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 7, 2025 | 0.30 |
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. GSKH — Risk / Return Rank
LGHT
GSKH
LGHT vs. GSKH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) and GSK plc ADRhedged ETF (GSKH). 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 | GSKH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.67 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.79 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | 1.30 | -0.46 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.76 | 2.31 | -3.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.60 | 6.06 | -7.65 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LGHT vs. GSKH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LGHT drawdown since its inception was -28.60%, which is greater than GSKH's maximum drawdown of -18.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGHT and GSKH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LGHT | GSKH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.60% | -18.54% | -10.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.57% | -18.54% | -7.03% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -26.31% | -11.62% | -14.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.95% | -5.86% | -2.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.10% | 7.06% | +5.04% |
Volatility
LGHT vs. GSKH - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) is 5.96%, while GSK plc ADRhedged ETF (GSKH) has a volatility of 6.89%. This indicates that LGHT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSKH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LGHT | GSKH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.96% | 6.89% | -0.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.67% | 18.67% | -4.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.85% | 26.14% | -7.29% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.96% | 26.95% | -7.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.96% | 26.95% | -7.99% |
LGHT vs. GSKH - Expense Ratio Comparison
LGHT has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than GSKH's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
LGHT vs. GSKH - Dividend Comparison
LGHT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GSKH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
GSKH GSK plc ADRhedged ETF | 2.82% | 1.15% |
LGHT Langar Global HealthTech ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LGHT and GSKH have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSKH has higher volatility (6.89%) compared to LGHT (5.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LGHT dropped -28.60% vs GSKH's -18.54%.
On 1-year performance, GSKH leads with 42.66% vs -19.29% for LGHT. On fees, GSKH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, LGHT has been the lower-risk option at 5.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GSKH has performed better with a 42.66% return vs -19.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSKH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for LGHT.
GSKH has the higher dividend yield at 2.82%, compared with 0.00% for LGHT.
They also come from different issuers: Langar and ADRhedged. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for LGHT and 0.19% for GSKH.
GSKH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.64 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 GSKH
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