LGHT vs. MSTZ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

LGHT (Langar Global HealthTech ETF) and MSTZ (T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LGHT is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by Langar, while MSTZ is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by REX. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LGHT returned -13.99% vs 159.07% for MSTZ. Their -0.29 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. LGHT charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for MSTZ.

Performance

LGHT vs. MSTZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LGHT achieves a -13.35% return, which is significantly higher than MSTZ's -30.44% return.

LGHT

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: -3.54%
• 6M: -12.52%
• YTD: -13.35%
• 1Y: -13.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -5.99%

MSTZ

• 1D: 8.95%
• 1M: 7.38%
• 6M: -24.16%
• YTD: -30.44%
• 1Y: 159.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -86.57%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
LGHT Langar Global HealthTech ETF	$39.43K	$23.15K	$16.97K
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	$101.73M	$133.33M	$177.41M

LGHT vs. MSTZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LGHT Langar Global HealthTech ETF	-13.35%	-1.66%	-4.61%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	-30.44%	-38.95%	-94.43%

Correlation

The correlation between LGHT and MSTZ is -0.24, 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.	-0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2024	-0.29

Return for Risk

LGHT vs. MSTZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

LGHT

LGHT Risk / Return Rank: 4
LGHT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
LGHT Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
LGHT Omega Ratio Rank: 4
LGHT Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
LGHT Martin Ratio Rank: 4

MSTZ

MSTZ Risk / Return Rank: 61
MSTZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
MSTZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
MSTZ Omega Ratio Rank: 68
MSTZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
MSTZ Martin Ratio Rank: 42

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

LGHT vs. MSTZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). 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	MSTZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.71	1.38	-2.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.90	2.22	-3.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.90	1.28	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.56	2.44	-3.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.05	4.53	-5.59

LGHT vs. MSTZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGHT Sharpe Ratio is -0.71, which is lower than the MSTZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGHT and MSTZ, 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

LGHT vs. MSTZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGHT drawdown since its inception was -28.60%, smaller than the maximum MSTZ drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGHT and MSTZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGHT	MSTZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.60%	-99.38%	+70.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.57%	-84.89%	+59.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.09%	-97.63%	+75.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.57%	-94.63%	+86.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.61%	45.62%	-32.01%

Volatility

LGHT vs. MSTZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) is 8.36%, while T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ) has a volatility of 37.86%. This indicates that LGHT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LGHT	MSTZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.36%	37.86%	-29.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.46%	134.52%	-118.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.43%	150.23%	-129.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.42%	169.87%	-150.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.42%	169.87%	-150.45%

LGHT vs. MSTZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGHT has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTZ's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

LGHT vs. MSTZ - Dividend Comparison

Neither LGHT nor MSTZ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LGHT and MSTZ in my portfolio?

LGHT and MSTZ have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LGHT or MSTZ?

MSTZ has higher volatility (37.86%) compared to LGHT (8.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LGHT dropped -28.60% vs MSTZ's -99.38%.

Which ETF is better, LGHT or MSTZ?

On 1-year performance, MSTZ leads with 159.07% vs -13.99% for LGHT. On fees, LGHT is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, LGHT has been the lower-risk option at 8.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LGHT or MSTZ?

Over the 1-year period, MSTZ has performed better with a 159.07% return vs -13.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LGHT or MSTZ?

LGHT is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for MSTZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LGHT or MSTZ?

LGHT and MSTZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between LGHT and MSTZ?

LGHT is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while MSTZ is Inverse Equities. They also come from different issuers: Langar and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for LGHT and 1.05% for MSTZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSTZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs -0.71), 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.