LRCU vs. GBIL
LRCU (Tradr 2X Long LRCX Daily ETF) and GBIL (Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LRCU is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Tradr, while GBIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index. LRCU is actively managed, while GBIL is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. LRCU charges 1.30%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for GBIL.
Performance
LRCU vs. GBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LRCU achieves a 270.56% return, which is significantly higher than GBIL's 1.57% return.
LRCU
- 1D
- -18.44%
- 1M
- 38.68%
- YTD
- 270.56%
- 6M
- 254.04%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GBIL
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 0.25%
- YTD
- 1.57%
- 6M
- 1.66%
- 1Y
- 3.81%
- 3Y*
- 4.59%
- 5Y*
- 3.35%
- 10Y*
- —
LRCU vs. GBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LRCU Tradr 2X Long LRCX Daily ETF | 270.56% | 172.36% |
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 1.57% | 1.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between LRCU and GBIL is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2025 | -0.06 |
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
LRCU vs. GBIL — Risk / Return Rank
LRCU
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GBIL
LRCU vs. GBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tradr 2X Long LRCX Daily ETF (LRCU) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). 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.
| LRCU | GBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 42.59 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 191.21 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 1,621.11 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LRCU vs. GBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LRCU drawdown since its inception was -40.09%, which is greater than GBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRCU and GBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LRCU | GBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.09% | -0.76% | -39.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.02% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.76% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -0.76% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.44% | 0.00% | -18.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.25% | -0.04% | -9.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.00% | — |
Volatility
LRCU vs. GBIL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LRCU | GBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.05% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.14% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 116.41% | 0.23% | +116.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 116.41% | 0.58% | +115.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 116.41% | 0.47% | +115.94% |
LRCU vs. GBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
LRCU has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than GBIL's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
LRCU vs. GBIL - Dividend Comparison
LRCU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 3.74% | 4.02% | 4.93% | 4.77% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.81% | 2.20% | 1.70% | 0.74% | 0.11% |
LRCU Tradr 2X Long LRCX Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LRCU and GBIL have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GBIL is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for LRCU.
GBIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.74%, compared with 0.00% for LRCU.
LRCU is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while GBIL is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Tradr and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for LRCU and 0.12% for GBIL.
Find the right allocation for LRCU and GBIL
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