PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LIT vs. MTUM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LIT vs. MTUM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LIT achieves a 28.40% return, which is significantly lower than MTUM's 30.30% return. Over the past 10 years, LIT has underperformed MTUM with an annualized return of 14.38%, while MTUM has yielded a comparatively higher 17.19% annualized return.


LIT

1D
-1.86%
1M
-5.85%
YTD
28.40%
6M
34.19%
1Y
125.46%
3Y*
10.73%
5Y*
4.59%
10Y*
14.38%

MTUM

1D
-1.10%
1M
11.94%
YTD
30.30%
6M
29.99%
1Y
40.55%
3Y*
34.34%
5Y*
14.96%
10Y*
17.19%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LIT vs. MTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LIT
Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF
28.40%60.05%-19.19%-12.18%-29.91%36.74%127.88%3.27%-28.63%64.19%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
30.30%22.15%32.89%9.15%-18.27%13.36%29.86%27.25%-1.67%37.50%

Correlation

The correlation between LIT and MTUM is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.46

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.39

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2013

0.52

The correlation between LIT and MTUM shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (3 years) to 0.52 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LIT vs. MTUM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LIT
MTUM

Basic Materials

55.4%
1.7%

Industrials

26.0%
15.6%

Technology

11.5%
44.4%

Consumer Cyclical

7.0%
3.6%

Communication Services

-

7.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

3.3%

Energy

-

3.5%

Financial Services

-

10.4%

Healthcare

-

6.9%

Real Estate

-

1.8%

Utilities

-

1.6%

Basic Materials

LIT
55.4%
MTUM
1.7%

Industrials

LIT
26.0%
MTUM
15.6%

Technology

LIT
11.5%
MTUM
44.4%

Consumer Cyclical

LIT
7.0%
MTUM
3.6%

Communication Services

LIT

-

MTUM
7.4%

Consumer Defensive

LIT

-

MTUM
3.3%

Energy

LIT

-

MTUM
3.5%

Financial Services

LIT

-

MTUM
10.4%

Healthcare

LIT

-

MTUM
6.9%

Real Estate

LIT

-

MTUM
1.8%

Utilities

LIT

-

MTUM
1.6%

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. MTUM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

LIT
LIT Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

MTUM
MTUM Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
MTUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MTUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
MTUM Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
MTUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
MTUM Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

LIT vs. MTUM - 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 USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). 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.


LITMTUMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.73

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.38

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

9.62

3.53

+6.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

32.28

14.10

+18.19

LIT vs. MTUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIT Sharpe Ratio is 3.86, which is higher than the MTUM Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIT and MTUM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LITMTUMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.86

2.14

+1.73

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.14

0.73

-0.58

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

0.82

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.26

0.84

-0.58

Drawdowns

LIT vs. MTUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIT drawdown since its inception was -65.91%, which is greater than MTUM's maximum drawdown of -34.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIT and MTUM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LITMTUMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-65.91%

-34.08%

-31.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.11%

-11.54%

-1.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-53.01%

-20.99%

-32.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-65.91%

-32.28%

-33.63%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-65.91%

-34.08%

-31.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.23%

-1.10%

-9.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-33.63%

-6.21%

-27.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.90%

2.89%

+1.01%

Volatility

LIT vs. MTUM - Volatility Comparison

Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a higher volatility of 8.66% compared to iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) at 7.67%. This indicates that LIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MTUM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LITMTUMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.66%

7.67%

+0.99%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.09%

16.51%

+5.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

32.75%

19.08%

+13.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.81%

20.60%

+11.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.66%

21.03%

+9.63%

LIT vs. MTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison

LIT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than MTUM's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

LIT vs. MTUM - Dividend Comparison

LIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than MTUM's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
0.60%0.91%0.75%1.35%1.80%0.55%0.83%1.48%1.27%1.02%1.43%1.12%

Frequently Asked Questions


LIT and MTUM have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LIT has higher volatility (8.66%) compared to MTUM (7.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIT dropped -65.91% vs MTUM's -34.08%.

On 10-year performance, MTUM leads with 17.19% vs 14.38% for LIT. On fees, MTUM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, MTUM has been the lower-risk option at 7.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, MTUM has performed better with a 17.19% return vs 14.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MTUM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.

MTUM has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.38% for LIT.

LIT is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while MTUM is Momentum. LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index, while MTUM tracks MSCI USA Momentum SR Variant Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LIT and 0.15% for MTUM.

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.14), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LIT and MTUM

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