LIT vs. LITP
LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) and LITP (Sprott Lithium Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LIT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index, while LITP is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Sprott Lithium Miners Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LIT returned 11.20%/yr vs -0.12%/yr for LITP. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LIT charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LITP.
Performance
LIT vs. LITP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LIT achieves a 30.84% return, which is significantly higher than LITP's 28.96% return.
LIT
- 1D
- -1.78%
- 1M
- -2.59%
- YTD
- 30.84%
- 6M
- 34.89%
- 1Y
- 135.24%
- 3Y*
- 11.20%
- 5Y*
- 4.98%
- 10Y*
- 14.81%
LITP
- 1D
- -4.66%
- 1M
- -7.17%
- YTD
- 28.96%
- 6M
- 41.58%
- 1Y
- 218.79%
- 3Y*
- -0.12%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LIT vs. LITP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF | 30.84% | 60.05% | -19.19% | -28.68% |
LITP Sprott Lithium Miners ETF | 28.96% | 94.65% | -43.85% | -36.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between LIT and LITP is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2023 | 0.83 |
The correlation between LIT and LITP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.
LIT vs. LITP - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LIT
LITP
Basic Materials
Industrials
-
Technology
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
LIT
LITP
Industrials
LIT
LITP
-
Technology
LIT
LITP
-
Consumer Cyclical
LIT
LITP
-
Communication Services
LIT
-
LITP
-
Consumer Defensive
LIT
-
LITP
-
Energy
LIT
-
LITP
-
Financial Services
LIT
-
LITP
-
Healthcare
LIT
-
LITP
-
Real Estate
LIT
-
LITP
-
Utilities
LIT
-
LITP
-
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. LITP — Risk / Return Rank
LIT
LITP
LIT vs. LITP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) and Sprott Lithium Miners ETF (LITP). 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.
| LIT | LITP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.79 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.59 | 1.45 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 10.37 | 7.08 | +3.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 35.19 | 21.48 | +13.70 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LIT | LITP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.16 | 3.78 | +0.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.48 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.27 | -0.07 | +0.33 |
Drawdowns
LIT vs. LITP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LIT drawdown since its inception was -65.91%, smaller than the maximum LITP drawdown of -74.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIT and LITP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LIT | LITP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.91% | -74.72% | +8.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.11% | -31.12% | +18.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -53.01% | -74.31% | +21.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -65.91% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -65.91% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.53% | -14.47% | +5.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.63% | -42.29% | +8.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.86% | 10.23% | -6.37% |
Volatility
LIT vs. LITP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) is 8.67%, while Sprott Lithium Miners ETF (LITP) has a volatility of 13.36%. This indicates that LIT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LITP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LIT | LITP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.67% | 13.36% | -4.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.00% | 39.69% | -17.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.68% | 58.34% | -25.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.83% | 47.34% | -15.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.66% | 47.34% | -16.68% |
LIT vs. LITP - Expense Ratio Comparison
LIT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than LITP's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
LIT vs. LITP - Dividend Comparison
LIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than LITP's 5.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF | 0.37% | 0.49% | 0.93% | 1.11% | 0.99% | 0.22% | 0.40% | 1.85% | 2.52% | 3.26% | 2.15% | 0.24% |
LITP Sprott Lithium Miners ETF | 5.74% | 7.41% | 6.55% | 2.80% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LIT and LITP have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LITP has higher volatility (13.36%) compared to LIT (8.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIT dropped -65.91% vs LITP's -74.72%.
On 3-year performance, LIT leads with 11.20% vs -0.12% for LITP. On fees, LITP is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LIT has been the lower-risk option at 8.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, LIT has performed better with a 11.20% return vs -0.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LITP is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.
LITP has the higher dividend yield at 5.74%, compared with 0.37% for LIT.
LIT is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while LITP is Energy Equities. LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index, while LITP tracks Nasdaq Sprott Lithium Miners Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Sprott. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LIT and 0.65% for LITP.
LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.16 vs 3.78), 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 LITP
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