LIT vs. ALB
LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) is Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index, while ALB (Albemarle Corporation) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, LIT returned 12.66%/yr vs 4.77%/yr for ALB. Their 0.68 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently.
Performance
LIT vs. ALB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LIT achieves a 7.18% return, which is significantly higher than ALB's -16.41% return. Over the past 10 years, LIT has outperformed ALB with an annualized return of 12.66%, while ALB has yielded a comparatively lower 4.77% annualized return.
LIT
- 1D
- -0.85%
- 1M
- -9.55%
- 6M
- -0.62%
- YTD
- 7.18%
- 1Y
- 70.85%
- 3Y*
- 2.87%
- 5Y*
- -2.82%
- 10Y*
- 12.66%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.36%
ALB
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -13.22%
- 6M
- -30.71%
- YTD
- -16.41%
- 1Y
- 75.60%
- 3Y*
- -16.02%
- 5Y*
- -9.53%
- 10Y*
- 4.77%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.63%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $278.16M | $258.77M | $355.35M | |
| $15.35M | $16.35M | $33.70M |
LIT vs. ALB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF | 7.18% | 60.05% | -19.19% | -12.18% | -29.91% | 36.74% | 127.88% | 3.27% | -28.63% | 64.19% |
ALB Albemarle Corporation | -16.41% | 67.72% | -39.50% | -32.80% | -6.63% | 59.76% | 105.39% | -3.28% | -38.89% | 50.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between LIT and ALB is 0.69, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.69 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.74 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.74 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2010 | 0.68 |
The correlation between LIT and ALB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
LIT vs. ALB — Risk / Return Rank
LIT
ALB
LIT vs. ALB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) and Albemarle Corporation (ALB). 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.
| LIT | ALB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.71 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.23 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.62 | 1.61 | +1.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.37 | 4.40 | +3.97 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LIT vs. ALB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LIT drawdown since its inception was -65.91%, smaller than the maximum ALB drawdown of -83.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIT and ALB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LIT | ALB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.91% | -83.90% | +17.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.84% | -47.38% | +20.54% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -49.44% | -74.05% | +24.61% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -65.91% | -83.90% | +17.99% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -65.91% | -83.90% | +17.99% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -25.06% | -61.95% | +36.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.48% | -20.83% | -12.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.40% | 17.27% | -8.87% |
Volatility
LIT vs. ALB - Volatility Comparison
Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a higher volatility of 9.34% compared to Albemarle Corporation (ALB) at 8.79%. This indicates that LIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ALB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LIT | ALB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.34% | 8.79% | +0.55% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 25.15% | 40.94% | -15.79% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 34.47% | 59.34% | -24.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.93% | 54.68% | -22.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.80% | 48.44% | -17.64% |
Dividends
LIT vs. ALB - Dividend Comparison
LIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%, less than ALB's 1.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ALB Albemarle Corporation | 1.38% | 1.15% | 1.87% | 1.11% | 0.73% | 0.67% | 1.04% | 2.01% | 1.74% | 1.00% | 1.42% | 2.07% |
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF | 0.73% | 0.49% | 0.93% | 1.11% | 0.99% | 0.22% | 0.40% | 1.85% | 2.52% | 3.26% | 2.15% | 0.24% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LIT and ALB have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LIT has higher volatility (9.34%) compared to ALB (8.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIT dropped -65.91% vs ALB's -83.90%.
LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.28), 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 LIT and ALB
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