LIT vs. PHO
LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) and PHO (Invesco Water Resources ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LIT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index, while PHO is a Water Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ OMX US Water Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LIT returned 14.53%/yr vs 11.71%/yr for PHO. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LIT charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for PHO.
Performance
LIT vs. PHO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LIT achieves a 27.00% return, which is significantly higher than PHO's -4.97% return. Over the past 10 years, LIT has outperformed PHO with an annualized return of 14.53%, while PHO has yielded a comparatively lower 11.71% annualized return.
LIT
- 1D
- 2.02%
- 1M
- -5.27%
- YTD
- 27.00%
- 6M
- 29.31%
- 1Y
- 124.44%
- 3Y*
- 9.00%
- 5Y*
- 4.01%
- 10Y*
- 14.53%
PHO
- 1D
- 0.63%
- 1M
- 2.30%
- YTD
- -4.97%
- 6M
- -6.44%
- 1Y
- -1.80%
- 3Y*
- 7.13%
- 5Y*
- 5.17%
- 10Y*
- 11.71%
LIT vs. PHO - 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% | 64.19% |
PHO Invesco Water Resources ETF | -4.97% | 7.62% | 8.59% | 18.85% | -14.86% | 31.28% | 20.83% | 37.57% | -6.40% | 23.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between LIT and PHO is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2010 | 0.58 |
Over the past year, the correlation between LIT and PHO has dropped to 0.36 - well below their long-term average of 0.58, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
LIT vs. PHO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LIT
PHO
Basic Materials
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
LIT
PHO
Industrials
LIT
PHO
Technology
LIT
PHO
Consumer Cyclical
LIT
PHO
-
Communication Services
LIT
-
PHO
-
Consumer Defensive
LIT
-
PHO
-
Energy
LIT
-
PHO
-
Financial Services
LIT
-
PHO
Healthcare
LIT
-
PHO
Real Estate
LIT
-
PHO
-
Utilities
LIT
-
PHO
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. PHO — Risk / Return Rank
LIT
PHO
LIT vs. PHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) and Invesco Water Resources ETF (PHO). 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 | PHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +3.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +4.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 0.98 | +0.54 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.36 | -0.23 | +7.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 27.27 | -0.58 | +27.84 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LIT vs. PHO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LIT drawdown since its inception was -65.91%, which is greater than PHO's maximum drawdown of -55.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIT and PHO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LIT | PHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.91% | -55.62% | -10.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.46% | -13.78% | -2.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -53.01% | -19.19% | -33.82% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -65.91% | -28.60% | -37.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -65.91% | -34.92% | -30.99% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.21% | -10.21% | -1.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.59% | -10.18% | -23.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.45% | 5.59% | -1.14% |
Volatility
LIT vs. PHO - Volatility Comparison
Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a higher volatility of 11.56% compared to Invesco Water Resources ETF (PHO) at 4.41%. This indicates that LIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PHO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LIT | PHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.56% | 4.41% | +7.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.80% | 11.15% | +12.65% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 33.94% | 15.12% | +18.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.04% | 18.40% | +13.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.77% | 19.46% | +11.31% |
LIT vs. PHO - Expense Ratio Comparison
LIT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than PHO's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
LIT vs. PHO - Dividend Comparison
LIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than PHO's 0.58% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
PHO Invesco Water Resources ETF | 0.58% | 0.54% | 0.45% | 0.59% | 0.49% | 0.20% | 0.39% | 0.43% | 0.46% | 0.34% | 0.47% | 0.75% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LIT and PHO have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LIT has higher volatility (11.56%) compared to PHO (4.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIT dropped -65.91% vs PHO's -55.62%.
On 10-year performance, LIT leads with 14.53% vs 11.71% for PHO. On fees, PHO is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, PHO has been the lower-risk option at 4.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, LIT has performed better with a 14.53% return vs 11.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PHO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.
PHO has the higher dividend yield at 0.58%, compared with 0.38% for LIT.
LIT is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while PHO is Water Equities. LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index, while PHO tracks NASDAQ OMX US Water Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LIT and 0.60% for PHO.
LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.57 vs -0.21), 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 PHO
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