LGHT vs. YCS

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

LGHT (Langar Global HealthTech ETF) and YCS (ProShares UltraShort Yen) are both exchange-traded funds - LGHT is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by Langar, while YCS is a Leveraged Currency fund tracking the USD/JPY Exchange Rate (-200%). LGHT is actively managed, while YCS is passively managed. Over the past year, LGHT returned -11.86% vs 21.34% for YCS. Their -0.13 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. LGHT charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for YCS.

Performance

LGHT vs. YCS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) and ProShares UltraShort Yen (YCS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LGHT achieves a -11.21% return, which is significantly lower than YCS's 4.11% return.

LGHT

• 1D: 2.48%
• 1M: -1.15%
• 6M: -9.79%
• YTD: -11.21%
• 1Y: -11.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -5.07%

YCS

• 1D: -2.97%
• 1M: -5.17%
• 6M: 5.08%
• YTD: 4.11%
• 1Y: 21.34%
• 3Y*: 16.96%
• 5Y*: 22.90%
• 10Y*: 13.21%
• ALL TIME*: 6.26%

*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	$39.55K	$23.01K	$17.27K
YCS ProShares UltraShort Yen	$2.37M	$2.29M	$1.56M

LGHT vs. YCS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LGHT Langar Global HealthTech ETF	-11.21%	-1.66%	0.23%
YCS ProShares UltraShort Yen	4.11%	9.04%	28.63%

Correlation

The correlation between LGHT and YCS is -0.26, 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.	-0.26
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 10, 2024	-0.13

The correlation between LGHT and YCS shifts across timeframes, from -0.26 (1 year) to -0.13 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LGHT vs. YCS — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGHT

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

YCS

YCS Risk / Return Rank: 59
YCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
YCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
YCS Omega Ratio Rank: 56
YCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
YCS Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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. YCS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) and ProShares UltraShort Yen (YCS). 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	YCS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.59	1.31	-1.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.71	1.71	-2.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.26	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.47	2.53	-2.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.87	9.53	-10.40

LGHT vs. YCS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGHT Sharpe Ratio is -0.59, which is lower than the YCS Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGHT and YCS, 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. YCS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGHT drawdown since its inception was -28.60%, smaller than the maximum YCS drawdown of -49.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGHT and YCS.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGHT	YCS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.60%	-49.56%	+20.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.57%	-8.48%	-17.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.05%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.32%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-27.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-20.17%	-8.48%	-11.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.58%	-19.75%	+11.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.65%	2.24%	+11.41%

Volatility

LGHT vs. YCS - Volatility Comparison

Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) has a higher volatility of 8.16% compared to ProShares UltraShort Yen (YCS) at 5.88%. This indicates that LGHT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than YCS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LGHT	YCS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.16%	5.88%	+2.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.64%	11.84%	+4.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.32%	16.43%	+3.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.47%	21.21%	-1.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.47%	18.61%	+0.86%

LGHT vs. YCS - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGHT has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than YCS's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

LGHT vs. YCS - Dividend Comparison

Neither LGHT nor YCS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LGHT and YCS in my portfolio?

LGHT and YCS have a correlation of -0.26, 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 YCS?

LGHT has higher volatility (8.16%) compared to YCS (5.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LGHT dropped -28.60% vs YCS's -49.56%.

Which ETF is better, LGHT or YCS?

On 1-year performance, YCS leads with 21.34% vs -11.86% for LGHT. On fees, LGHT is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, YCS has been the lower-risk option at 5.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LGHT or YCS?

Over the 1-year period, YCS has performed better with a 21.34% return vs -11.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LGHT or YCS?

LGHT is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for YCS.

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

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

What is the main difference between LGHT and YCS?

LGHT is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while YCS is Leveraged Currency. They also come from different issuers: Langar and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for LGHT and 1.00% for YCS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

YCS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.31 vs -0.59), 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.