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

Performance

LIT vs. XYLD - 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 S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD). 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 30.84% return, which is significantly higher than XYLD's 4.96% return. Over the past 10 years, LIT has outperformed XYLD with an annualized return of 14.81%, while XYLD has yielded a comparatively lower 8.25% annualized 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%

XYLD

1D
-0.15%
1M
2.00%
YTD
4.96%
6M
6.48%
1Y
17.66%
3Y*
11.27%
5Y*
7.72%
10Y*
8.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LIT vs. XYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LIT
Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF
30.84%60.05%-19.19%-12.18%-29.91%36.74%127.88%3.27%-28.63%64.19%
XYLD
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
4.96%8.02%19.49%11.10%-12.05%19.59%-0.56%21.41%-6.09%16.49%

Correlation

The correlation between LIT and XYLD is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.44

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 Jun 25, 2013

0.52

The correlation between LIT and XYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.42 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

LIT vs. XYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LIT
XYLD

Basic Materials

55.4%
1.8%

Industrials

26.0%
8.3%

Technology

11.5%
35.6%

Consumer Cyclical

7.0%
10.2%

Communication Services

-

11.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.9%

Energy

-

3.5%

Financial Services

-

11.8%

Healthcare

-

8.5%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Utilities

-

2.3%

Basic Materials

LIT
55.4%
XYLD
1.8%

Industrials

LIT
26.0%
XYLD
8.3%

Technology

LIT
11.5%
XYLD
35.6%

Consumer Cyclical

LIT
7.0%
XYLD
10.2%

Communication Services

LIT

-

XYLD
11.2%

Consumer Defensive

LIT

-

XYLD
4.9%

Energy

LIT

-

XYLD
3.5%

Financial Services

LIT

-

XYLD
11.8%

Healthcare

LIT

-

XYLD
8.5%

Real Estate

LIT

-

XYLD
1.9%

Utilities

LIT

-

XYLD
2.3%

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. XYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

LIT
LIT Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

XYLD
XYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
XYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
XYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
XYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
XYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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. XYLD - 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 S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD). 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.


LITXYLDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.64

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

10.37

3.35

+7.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

35.19

17.84

+17.34

LIT vs. XYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIT Sharpe Ratio is 4.16, which is higher than the XYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIT and XYLD, 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


LITXYLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.16

2.71

+1.45

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

0.69

-0.53

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

0.58

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.60

-0.33

Drawdowns

LIT vs. XYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIT drawdown since its inception was -65.91%, which is greater than XYLD's maximum drawdown of -33.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIT and XYLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LITXYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-65.91%

-33.46%

-32.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.11%

-5.29%

-7.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-53.01%

-15.53%

-37.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-65.91%

-18.66%

-47.25%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-65.91%

-33.46%

-32.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.53%

-0.15%

-8.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-33.63%

-3.72%

-29.91%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.86%

0.99%

+2.87%

Volatility

LIT vs. XYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a higher volatility of 8.67% compared to Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (XYLD) at 0.88%. This indicates that LIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LITXYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.67%

0.88%

+7.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.00%

5.37%

+16.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

32.68%

6.55%

+26.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.83%

11.22%

+20.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.66%

14.21%

+16.45%

LIT vs. XYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

LIT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than XYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

LIT vs. XYLD - Dividend Comparison

LIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than XYLD's 10.52% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XYLD
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
10.52%10.51%11.54%10.51%13.43%9.07%7.93%5.76%7.12%5.18%3.23%4.65%

Frequently Asked Questions


LIT and XYLD have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LIT has higher volatility (8.67%) compared to XYLD (0.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIT dropped -65.91% vs XYLD's -33.46%.

On 10-year performance, LIT leads with 14.81% vs 8.25% for XYLD. On fees, XYLD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, XYLD has been the lower-risk option at 0.88%. 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 14.81% return vs 8.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XYLD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.

XYLD has the higher dividend yield at 10.52%, compared with 0.37% for LIT.

LIT is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while XYLD is Derivative Income. LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index, while XYLD tracks Cboe S&P 500 BuyWrite Index. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LIT and 0.60% for XYLD.

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.16 vs 2.71), 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 XYLD

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