LIT vs. EMXC
LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) and EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LIT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index, while EMXC is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LIT returned 4.01%/yr vs 12.14%/yr for EMXC. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LIT charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EMXC.
Performance
LIT vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LIT achieves a 27.00% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC's 37.25% return.
LIT
- 1D
- 2.02%
- 1M
- -8.05%
- YTD
- 27.00%
- 6M
- 29.31%
- 1Y
- 120.44%
- 3Y*
- 9.00%
- 5Y*
- 4.01%
- 10Y*
- 14.53%
EMXC
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 3.75%
- YTD
- 37.25%
- 6M
- 42.23%
- 1Y
- 65.26%
- 3Y*
- 26.47%
- 5Y*
- 12.14%
- 10Y*
- —
LIT vs. EMXC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF | 27.00% | 60.05% | -19.19% | -12.18% | -29.91% | 36.74% | 127.88% | 3.27% | -28.63% | 28.88% |
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF | 37.25% | 35.14% | 2.68% | 18.96% | -19.56% | 8.54% | 12.76% | 15.80% | -12.96% | 7.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between LIT and EMXC is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2017 | 0.60 |
The correlation between LIT and EMXC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.
LIT vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LIT
EMXC
Basic Materials
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
LIT
EMXC
Industrials
LIT
EMXC
Technology
LIT
EMXC
Consumer Cyclical
LIT
EMXC
Communication Services
LIT
-
EMXC
Consumer Defensive
LIT
-
EMXC
Energy
LIT
-
EMXC
Financial Services
LIT
-
EMXC
Healthcare
LIT
-
EMXC
Real Estate
LIT
-
EMXC
Utilities
LIT
-
EMXC
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. EMXC — Risk / Return Rank
LIT
EMXC
LIT vs. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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 | EMXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 1.50 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.36 | 4.55 | +2.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 27.27 | 17.51 | +9.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LIT vs. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LIT drawdown since its inception was -65.91%, which is greater than EMXC's maximum drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIT and EMXC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LIT | EMXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.91% | -42.81% | -23.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.46% | -14.41% | -2.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -53.01% | -19.12% | -33.89% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -65.91% | -28.91% | -37.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -65.91% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.21% | -4.12% | -7.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.59% | -10.17% | -23.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.45% | 3.74% | +0.71% |
Volatility
LIT vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) is 11.56%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 12.83%. This indicates that LIT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LIT | EMXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.56% | 12.83% | -1.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.80% | 21.90% | +1.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 33.94% | 23.90% | +10.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.04% | 18.00% | +14.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.77% | 20.07% | +10.70% |
LIT vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison
LIT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
LIT vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison
LIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than EMXC's 2.05% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF | 2.05% | 2.82% | 2.69% | 1.83% | 2.85% | 1.78% | 1.45% | 3.25% | 2.63% | 0.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF | 0.38% | 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 EMXC have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMXC has higher volatility (12.83%) compared to LIT (11.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIT dropped -65.91% vs EMXC's -42.81%.
On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 12.14% vs 4.01% for LIT. On fees, EMXC is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, LIT has been the lower-risk option at 11.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 12.14% return vs 4.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EMXC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.
EMXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.05%, compared with 0.38% for LIT.
LIT is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while EMXC is Emerging Markets Equities. LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index, while EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LIT and 0.49% for EMXC.
LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.57 vs 2.74), 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 EMXC
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