PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LNGZX vs. LNG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LNGZX vs. LNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Greater China Fund (LNGZX) and Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LNGZX achieves a -9.19% return, which is significantly lower than LNG's 19.35% return. Over the past 10 years, LNGZX has underperformed LNG with an annualized return of 3.90%, while LNG has yielded a comparatively higher 21.41% annualized return.


LNGZX

1D
0.58%
1M
-4.66%
YTD
-9.19%
6M
-10.26%
1Y
3.04%
3Y*
3.37%
5Y*
-10.92%
10Y*
3.90%

LNG

1D
1.68%
1M
-4.15%
YTD
19.35%
6M
22.51%
1Y
-0.78%
3Y*
16.97%
5Y*
22.57%
10Y*
21.41%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LNGZX vs. LNG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LNGZX
Columbia Greater China Fund
-9.19%27.49%12.29%-18.70%-28.42%-25.21%46.04%32.95%-20.01%59.90%
LNG
Cheniere Energy, Inc.
19.35%-8.70%27.18%15.02%49.30%69.48%-1.70%3.18%9.94%29.95%

Correlation

The correlation between LNGZX and LNG is -0.10, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.10

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

0.05

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

0.10

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

0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 1998

0.20

The correlation between LNGZX and LNG shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.20 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

LNGZX vs. LNG — Risk / Return Rank

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

LNGZX
LNGZX Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
LNGZX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LNGZX Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
LNGZX Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
LNGZX Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
LNGZX Martin Ratio Rank: 33
Martin Ratio Rank

LNG
LNG Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
LNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
LNG Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
LNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
LNG Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
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.

LNGZX vs. LNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Greater China Fund (LNGZX) and Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG). 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.


LNGZXLNGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.02

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.12

-0.03

+0.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.25

-0.06

+0.32

LNGZX vs. LNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LNGZX Sharpe Ratio is 0.11, which is higher than the LNG Sharpe Ratio of -0.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LNGZX and LNG, 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...

Drawdowns

LNGZX vs. LNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LNGZX drawdown since its inception was -73.37%, smaller than the maximum LNG drawdown of -97.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LNGZX and LNG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LNGZXLNGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-73.37%

-97.84%

+24.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.13%

-24.09%

+4.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.71%

-24.87%

-1.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-63.73%

-24.87%

-38.86%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-67.94%

-57.53%

-10.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-52.64%

-22.07%

-30.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-26.56%

-43.13%

+16.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.32%

12.28%

-2.96%

Volatility

LNGZX vs. LNG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Columbia Greater China Fund (LNGZX) is 6.30%, while Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG) has a volatility of 7.68%. This indicates that LNGZX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LNGZXLNGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.30%

7.68%

-1.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.68%

21.84%

-6.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.03%

27.25%

-6.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.00%

30.25%

-0.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.56%

32.44%

-5.88%

Dividends

LNGZX vs. LNG - Dividend Comparison

LNGZX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.07%, more than LNG's 0.94% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LNG
Cheniere Energy, Inc.
0.94%1.06%0.84%0.95%0.92%0.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
LNGZX
Columbia Greater China Fund
2.07%1.88%1.21%0.67%0.00%0.00%4.29%1.40%5.85%1.20%0.00%4.54%

Frequently Asked Questions


LNGZX and LNG have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LNG has higher volatility (7.68%) compared to LNGZX (6.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LNGZX dropped -73.37% vs LNG's -97.84%.

LNGZX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.11 vs -0.03), 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 LNGZX and LNG

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