LIT vs. SHLD

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) and SHLD (Global X Defense Tech ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LIT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index, while SHLD is a Aerospace & Defense fund tracking the Global X Defense Tech Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, LIT returned 125.46% vs 11.52% for SHLD. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LIT charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for SHLD.

Performance

LIT vs. SHLD - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LIT achieves a 28.40% return, which is significantly higher than SHLD's -0.74% 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%

SHLD

• 1D: 1.58%
• 1M: -4.77%
• YTD: -0.74%
• 6M: 2.22%
• 1Y: 11.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LIT vs. SHLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	28.40%	60.05%	-19.19%	-10.82%
SHLD Global X Defense Tech ETF	-0.74%	74.16%	35.03%	12.89%

Correlation

The correlation between LIT and SHLD is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2023	0.26

LIT vs. SHLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LIT	SHLD
Basic Materials	55.4%	-
Industrials	26.0%	88.2%
Technology	11.5%	11.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.0%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

LIT vs. SHLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

LIT

LIT Risk / Return Rank: 93
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 89
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 95

SHLD

SHLD Risk / Return Rank: 17
SHLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
SHLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
SHLD Omega Ratio Rank: 17
SHLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
SHLD Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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. SHLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) and Global X Defense Tech ETF (SHLD). 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	SHLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.86	0.48	+3.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.23	0.84	+3.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.10	+0.46
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.62	0.58	+9.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	32.28	1.52	+30.76
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LIT vs. SHLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIT Sharpe Ratio is 3.86, which is higher than the SHLD Sharpe Ratio of 0.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIT and SHLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LIT	SHLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.86	0.48	+3.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.14	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.47	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	2.03	-1.77

Drawdowns

LIT vs. SHLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIT drawdown since its inception was -65.91%, which is greater than SHLD's maximum drawdown of -20.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIT and SHLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	LIT	SHLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-65.91%	-20.10%	-45.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.11%	-20.10%	+6.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-53.01%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-65.91%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-65.91%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.23%	-17.57%	+7.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.63%	-3.21%	-30.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.90%	7.60%	-3.70%

Volatility

LIT vs. SHLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a higher volatility of 8.66% compared to Global X Defense Tech ETF (SHLD) at 8.02%. This indicates that LIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SHLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LIT	SHLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.66%	8.02%	+0.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.09%	19.39%	+2.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.75%	24.08%	+8.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.81%	21.14%	+10.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.66%	21.14%	+9.52%

LIT vs. SHLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

LIT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than SHLD's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

LIT vs. SHLD - Dividend Comparison

LIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than SHLD's 0.55% 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%
SHLD Global X Defense Tech ETF	0.55%	0.55%	0.53%	0.26%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LIT and SHLD in my portfolio?

LIT and SHLD have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LIT or SHLD?

LIT has higher volatility (8.66%) compared to SHLD (8.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIT dropped -65.91% vs SHLD's -20.10%.

Which ETF is better, LIT or SHLD?

On 1-year performance, LIT leads with 125.46% vs 11.52% for SHLD. On fees, SHLD is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, SHLD has been the lower-risk option at 8.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LIT or SHLD?

Over the 1-year period, LIT has performed better with a 125.46% return vs 11.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LIT or SHLD?

SHLD is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LIT or SHLD?

SHLD has the higher dividend yield at 0.55%, compared with 0.38% for LIT.

What is the main difference between LIT and SHLD?

LIT is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while SHLD is Aerospace & Defense. LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index, while SHLD tracks Global X Defense Tech Index. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LIT and 0.50% for SHLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 0.48), 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.