LRNZ vs. GQGU
LRNZ (TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF) and GQGU (GQG US Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. LRNZ charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GQGU.
Performance
LRNZ vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
LRNZ
- 1D
- -3.48%
- 1M
- —
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GQGU
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.43%
- 6M
- 4.51%
- YTD
- 5.74%
- 1Y
- 4.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LRNZ vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF | -5.22% |
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 0.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between LRNZ and GQGU 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2026 | -0.10 |
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
LRNZ vs. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank
LRNZ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GQGU
LRNZ vs. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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 | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.08 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 0.56 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 1.36 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LRNZ vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LRNZ drawdown since its inception was -5.22%, smaller than the maximum GQGU drawdown of -8.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRNZ and GQGU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LRNZ | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.22% | -8.41% | +3.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.41% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.22% | -5.42% | +0.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.24% | -2.91% | +0.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.48% | — |
Volatility
LRNZ vs. GQGU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LRNZ | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.36% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 8.52% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.71% | 10.71% | +26.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.71% | 10.68% | +26.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.71% | 10.68% | +26.03% |
LRNZ vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
LRNZ has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
LRNZ vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison
LRNZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GQGU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 0.96% | 1.02% |
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LRNZ and GQGU 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.
On fees, GQGU is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GQGU is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for LRNZ.
GQGU has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.00% for LRNZ.
They also come from different issuers: TrueMark Investments and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for LRNZ and 0.49% for GQGU.
Find the right allocation for LRNZ and GQGU
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