LSAT vs. ISCMF

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

LSAT (Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF) and ISCMF (iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LSAT is a Money Market fund actively managed by Redwood, while ISCMF is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index. LSAT is actively managed, while ISCMF is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LSAT returned 11.89%/yr vs 15.20%/yr for ISCMF. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. LSAT charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for ISCMF.

Performance

LSAT vs. ISCMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF (LSAT) and iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LSAT achieves a 10.77% return, which is significantly lower than ISCMF's 22.87% return.

LSAT

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 1.70%
• YTD: 10.77%
• 6M: 9.61%
• 1Y: 10.81%
• 3Y*: 11.89%
• 5Y*: 6.09%
• 10Y*: —

ISCMF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.67%
• YTD: 22.87%
• 6M: 27.76%
• 1Y: 37.85%
• 3Y*: 15.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LSAT vs. ISCMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
LSAT Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF	10.77%	-1.54%	18.16%	13.64%	-10.33%
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF	22.87%	19.65%	3.13%	-9.58%	-5.08%

Correlation

The correlation between LSAT and ISCMF 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	-0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2022	-0.03

Return for Risk

LSAT vs. ISCMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

LSAT

LSAT Risk / Return Rank: 25
LSAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
LSAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
LSAT Omega Ratio Rank: 23
LSAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
LSAT Martin Ratio Rank: 24

ISCMF

ISCMF Risk / Return Rank: 82
ISCMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
ISCMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
ISCMF Omega Ratio Rank: 99
ISCMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
ISCMF Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

LSAT vs. ISCMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF (LSAT) and iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF). 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.

	LSAT	ISCMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.86	2.05	-1.19
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.34	3.74	-2.39
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	2.53	-1.37
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.35	6.66	-5.30
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.18	15.79	-12.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LSAT vs. ISCMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LSAT Sharpe Ratio is 0.86, which is lower than the ISCMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LSAT and ISCMF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LSAT	ISCMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86	2.05	-1.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.74	0.45	+0.29

Drawdowns

LSAT vs. ISCMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LSAT drawdown since its inception was -20.48%, smaller than the maximum ISCMF drawdown of -25.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LSAT and ISCMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	LSAT	ISCMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.48%	-25.42%	+4.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.94%	-5.69%	-2.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.25%	-7.62%	-10.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.48%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-5.26%	+5.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.56%	-13.44%	+7.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.37%	2.40%	+0.97%

Volatility

LSAT vs. ISCMF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF (LSAT) is 3.37%, while iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) has a volatility of 7.14%. This indicates that LSAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISCMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LSAT	ISCMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.37%	7.14%	-3.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.11%	15.90%	-6.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.57%	18.53%	-5.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.25%	14.38%	+1.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.76%	14.38%	+2.38%

LSAT vs. ISCMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

LSAT has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than ISCMF's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

LSAT vs. ISCMF - Dividend Comparison

LSAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, while ISCMF has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LSAT Leadershares Alphafactor Tactical Focused ETF	1.71%	1.90%	1.31%	1.85%	0.36%	3.44%	0.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LSAT and ISCMF in my portfolio?

LSAT and ISCMF 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.

Which is riskier, LSAT or ISCMF?

ISCMF has higher volatility (7.14%) compared to LSAT (3.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LSAT dropped -20.48% vs ISCMF's -25.42%.

Which ETF is better, LSAT or ISCMF?

On 3-year performance, ISCMF leads with 15.20% vs 11.89% for LSAT. On fees, ISCMF is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, LSAT has been the lower-risk option at 3.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LSAT or ISCMF?

Over the 3-year period, ISCMF has performed better with a 15.20% return vs 11.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LSAT or ISCMF?

ISCMF is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for LSAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LSAT or ISCMF?

LSAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.71%, compared with 0.00% for ISCMF.

What is the main difference between LSAT and ISCMF?

LSAT is categorized as Money Market, while ISCMF is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Redwood and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for LSAT and 0.19% for ISCMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ISCMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 0.86), 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.