LITU.L vs. BATG.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

LITU.L (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech UCITS ETF USD Acc) and BATG.L (L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF) are both Lithium & Battery Metals funds - LITU.L tracks the Solactive Global Lithium v2 Index while BATG.L tracks the Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LITU.L returned 8.31%/yr vs 22.11%/yr for BATG.L. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LITU.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for BATG.L.

Performance

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Lithium & Battery Tech UCITS ETF USD Acc (LITU.L) and L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

LITU.L is traded in USD, while BATG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the BATG.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LITU.L achieves a 19.83% return, which is significantly higher than BATG.L's 18.76% return.

LITU.L

• 1D: -0.84%
• 1M: -8.95%
• YTD: 19.83%
• 6M: 16.96%
• 1Y: 105.52%
• 3Y*: 8.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BATG.L

• 1D: -1.72%
• 1M: -12.48%
• YTD: 18.76%
• 6M: 16.78%
• 1Y: 97.12%
• 3Y*: 22.11%
• 5Y*: 13.65%
• 10Y*: —

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

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
LITU.L Global X Lithium & Battery Tech UCITS ETF USD Acc	19.83%	59.24%	-19.98%	-10.74%	-29.93%	-3.68%
BATG.L L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF	18.76%	72.52%	-1.20%	8.25%	-14.18%	2.21%

Correlation

The correlation between LITU.L and BATG.L is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2021	0.77

The correlation between LITU.L and BATG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LITU.L	BATG.L
Basic Materials	48.1%	24.0%
Technology	22.3%	17.5%
Industrials	20.4%	32.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.0%	19.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	7.1%

Return for Risk

LITU.L vs. BATG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LITU.L

LITU.L Risk / Return Rank: 92
LITU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
LITU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
LITU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 87
LITU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
LITU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 93

BATG.L

BATG.L Risk / Return Rank: 94
BATG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
BATG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
BATG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
BATG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
BATG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Lithium & Battery Tech UCITS ETF USD Acc (LITU.L) and L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L). 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.

	LITU.L	BATG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.26	3.12	+0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.62	3.55	+0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.47	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.45	5.78	+0.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.42	18.14	+2.28

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LITU.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.26, which is comparable to the BATG.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LITU.L and BATG.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LITU.L drawdown since its inception was -62.94%, which is greater than BATG.L's maximum drawdown of -57.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LITU.L and BATG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LITU.L	BATG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.94%	-57.13%	-5.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.27%	-16.72%	+0.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-51.89%	-34.08%	-17.81%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.08%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.46%	-16.18%	+1.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-34.98%	-19.82%	-15.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.15%	5.34%	-0.19%

Volatility

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Volatility Comparison

Global X Lithium & Battery Tech UCITS ETF USD Acc (LITU.L) and L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L) have volatilities of 10.62% and 11.11%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LITU.L	BATG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.62%	11.11%	-0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.19%	25.43%	-2.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.19%	30.93%	+1.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.62%	28.66%	+1.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.62%	28.78%	+1.84%

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LITU.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than BATG.L's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

LITU.L vs. BATG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LITU.L nor BATG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LITU.L and BATG.L in my portfolio?

LITU.L and BATG.L have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LITU.L or BATG.L?

On fees, BATG.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LITU.L or BATG.L?

BATG.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for LITU.L.

What is the main difference between LITU.L and BATG.L?

LITU.L tracks Solactive Global Lithium v2 Index, while BATG.L tracks Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Legal & General Investment Management. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for LITU.L and 0.49% for BATG.L.