LRNZ vs. DAT

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

LRNZ (TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF) and DAT (ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LRNZ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TrueMark Investments, while DAT is a Technology Equities fund tracking the FactSet Big Data Refiners Index. LRNZ is actively managed, while DAT is passively managed. At a correlation of -1.00, they often move in opposite directions. LRNZ charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for DAT.

Performance

LRNZ vs. DAT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

LRNZ

• 1D: -2.30%
• 1M: —
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DAT

• 1D: 1.44%
• 1M: 7.50%
• 6M: -0.95%
• YTD: -1.27%
• 1Y: -1.09%
• 3Y*: 14.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LRNZ vs. DAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF	-3.01%
DAT ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF	0.39%

Correlation

The correlation between LRNZ and DAT is -1.00, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2026	-1.00

LRNZ vs. DAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LRNZ	DAT
Technology	82.1%	96.9%
Healthcare	15.0%	0.7%
Communication Services	2.9%	2.3%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

LRNZ vs. DAT — 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.

DAT

DAT Risk / Return Rank: 9
DAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
DAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
DAT Omega Ratio Rank: 9
DAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
DAT Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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. DAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) and ProShares Big Data Refiners ETF (DAT). 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	DAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	-0.04	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	0.17	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.02	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	-0.03	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	-0.07	—

Drawdowns

LRNZ vs. DAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRNZ drawdown since its inception was -3.01%, smaller than the maximum DAT drawdown of -56.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRNZ and DAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRNZ	DAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.01%	-56.22%	+53.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-34.70%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-34.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.01%	-8.37%	+5.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.87%	-25.94%	+24.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	15.73%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	LRNZ	DAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	9.01%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	26.31%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.72%	30.92%	-13.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.72%	33.96%	-16.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.72%	33.96%	-16.24%

LRNZ vs. DAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRNZ has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than DAT's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

LRNZ vs. DAT - Dividend Comparison

Neither LRNZ nor DAT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LRNZ and DAT in my portfolio?

LRNZ and DAT have a correlation of -1.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LRNZ or DAT?

On fees, DAT is cheaper at 0.58% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LRNZ or DAT?

DAT is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for LRNZ.

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

LRNZ and DAT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between LRNZ and DAT?

LRNZ is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while DAT is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: TrueMark Investments and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for LRNZ and 0.58% for DAT.