LSAF vs. FTGC
LSAF (LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF) and FTGC (First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - LSAF is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the AlphaFactor US Core Equity Index, while FTGC is a Commodities fund actively managed by First Trust. LSAF is passively managed, while FTGC is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, LSAF returned 10.29%/yr vs 11.70%/yr for FTGC. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LSAF charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FTGC.
Performance
LSAF vs. FTGC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LSAF achieves a 14.16% return, which is significantly lower than FTGC's 16.89% return.
LSAF
- 1D
- 0.42%
- 1M
- 4.33%
- YTD
- 14.16%
- 6M
- 11.98%
- 1Y
- 23.24%
- 3Y*
- 19.79%
- 5Y*
- 10.29%
- 10Y*
- —
FTGC
- 1D
- -1.65%
- 1M
- -8.90%
- YTD
- 16.89%
- 6M
- 15.85%
- 1Y
- 28.35%
- 3Y*
- 13.63%
- 5Y*
- 11.70%
- 10Y*
- 6.98%
LSAF vs. FTGC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LSAF LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF | 14.16% | 12.01% | 18.09% | 15.48% | -13.12% | 22.75% | 6.92% | 28.35% | -15.47% |
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund | 16.89% | 14.61% | 9.96% | -5.36% | 17.36% | 27.95% | 2.17% | 6.40% | -9.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between LSAF and FTGC is -0.05, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2018 | 0.28 |
The correlation between LSAF and FTGC shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.28 (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
LSAF vs. FTGC — Risk / Return Rank
LSAF
FTGC
LSAF vs. FTGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). 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.
| LSAF | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.33 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.55 | 2.31 | +1.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.61 | 9.40 | +2.21 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LSAF vs. FTGC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LSAF drawdown since its inception was -41.67%, smaller than the maximum FTGC drawdown of -59.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LSAF and FTGC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LSAF | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.67% | -59.47% | +17.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.58% | -12.34% | +5.76% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.26% | -12.34% | -7.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.94% | -22.64% | -2.30% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.92% | -12.34% | +11.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.28% | -27.33% | +21.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.01% | 3.02% | -1.01% |
Volatility
LSAF vs. FTGC - Volatility Comparison
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) have volatilities of 3.47% and 3.33%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LSAF | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.47% | 3.33% | +0.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.43% | 13.32% | -2.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.33% | 15.64% | -1.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.43% | 15.89% | +2.54% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.82% | 14.72% | +7.10% |
LSAF vs. FTGC - Expense Ratio Comparison
LSAF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than FTGC's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
LSAF vs. FTGC - Dividend Comparison
LSAF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, less than FTGC's 16.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund | 16.40% | 17.74% | 3.05% | 3.34% | 10.35% | 7.21% | 0.00% | 0.81% | 0.80% | 1.21% |
LSAF LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF | 0.60% | 0.69% | 0.42% | 0.84% | 0.96% | 0.37% | 0.53% | 0.71% | 0.20% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LSAF and FTGC have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LSAF has higher volatility (3.47%) compared to FTGC (3.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LSAF dropped -41.67% vs FTGC's -59.47%.
On 5-year performance, FTGC leads with 11.70% vs 10.29% for LSAF. On fees, LSAF is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, FTGC has been the lower-risk option at 3.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FTGC has performed better with a 11.70% return vs 10.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LSAF is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FTGC.
FTGC has the higher dividend yield at 16.40%, compared with 0.60% for LSAF.
LSAF is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while FTGC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Redwood and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LSAF and 0.95% for FTGC.
FTGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.63), 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.
Find the right allocation for LSAF and FTGC
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