LRNZ vs. CHAT

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

LRNZ (TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF) and CHAT (Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LRNZ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TrueMark Investments, while CHAT is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LRNZ charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CHAT.

Performance

LRNZ vs. CHAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) and Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

LRNZ

• 1D: -3.48%
• 1M: —
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CHAT

• 1D: -5.30%
• 1M: -12.49%
• 6M: 36.21%
• YTD: 42.01%
• 1Y: 73.94%
• 3Y*: 41.74%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LRNZ vs. CHAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF	-5.22%
CHAT Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF	-9.37%

Correlation

The correlation between LRNZ and CHAT is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2026	0.90

LRNZ vs. CHAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LRNZ	CHAT
Technology	82.1%	75.7%
Healthcare	15.0%	-
Communication Services	2.9%	17.9%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.0%
Industrials	-	3.5%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

LRNZ vs. CHAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

LRNZ

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CHAT

CHAT Risk / Return Rank: 74
CHAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
CHAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
CHAT Omega Ratio Rank: 68
CHAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
CHAT Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

LRNZ vs. CHAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) and Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT). 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.

	LRNZ	CHAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.00	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.39	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.32	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.80	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	11.13	—

Drawdowns

LRNZ vs. CHAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRNZ drawdown since its inception was -5.22%, smaller than the maximum CHAT drawdown of -31.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRNZ and CHAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRNZ	CHAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.22%	-31.34%	+26.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-19.54%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-31.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.22%	-19.54%	+14.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.24%	-5.52%	+3.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	6.67%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	LRNZ	CHAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	16.90%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	32.39%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.71%	37.11%	-0.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.71%	31.83%	+4.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.71%	31.83%	+4.88%

LRNZ vs. CHAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRNZ has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than CHAT's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

LRNZ vs. CHAT - Dividend Comparison

LRNZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CHAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.01%.

Position	TTM	2025
CHAT Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF	2.01%	2.85%
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LRNZ and CHAT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, LRNZ and CHAT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, LRNZ or CHAT?

On fees, LRNZ is cheaper at 0.68% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LRNZ or CHAT?

LRNZ is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CHAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LRNZ or CHAT?

CHAT has the higher dividend yield at 2.01%, compared with 0.00% for LRNZ.

What is the main difference between LRNZ and CHAT?

LRNZ is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CHAT is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: TrueMark Investments and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for LRNZ and 0.75% for CHAT.