LTCN vs. ILS

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

LTCN (Grayscale Litecoin Trust) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LTCN is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the CoinDesk Litecoin Price Index, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. LTCN is passively managed, while ILS is actively managed. Over the past year, LTCN returned -62.06% vs 7.79% for ILS. Their -0.13 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. LTCN charges 2.50%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.

Performance

LTCN vs. ILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Grayscale Litecoin Trust (LTCN) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LTCN achieves a -45.85% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 3.55% return.

LTCN

• 1D: -1.86%
• 1M: -0.94%
• 6M: -34.71%
• YTD: -45.85%
• 1Y: -62.06%
• 3Y*: -12.64%
• 5Y*: -29.58%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -33.21%

ILS

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.99%
• 6M: 3.01%
• YTD: 3.55%
• 1Y: 7.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.34%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	$404.25K	$506.70K	$656.18K
LTCN Grayscale Litecoin Trust	$209.06K	$258.75K	$357.89K

LTCN vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LTCN Grayscale Litecoin Trust	-45.85%	-11.31%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	3.55%	3.54%

Correlation

The correlation between LTCN and ILS is -0.14, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	-0.13

Return for Risk

LTCN vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

LTCN

LTCN Risk / Return Rank: 2
LTCN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
LTCN Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
LTCN Omega Ratio Rank: 2
LTCN Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
LTCN Martin Ratio Rank: 3

ILS

ILS Risk / Return Rank: 97
ILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
ILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
ILS Omega Ratio Rank: 97
ILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ILS Martin Ratio Rank: 98

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

LTCN vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Grayscale Litecoin Trust (LTCN) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). 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.

	LTCN	ILS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.96	3.17	-4.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.58	5.29	-6.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	1.74	-0.92
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.86	14.14	-14.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.22	53.05	-54.27

LTCN vs. ILS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LTCN Sharpe Ratio is -0.96, which is lower than the ILS Sharpe Ratio of 3.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LTCN and ILS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

LTCN vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LTCN drawdown since its inception was -99.58%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -2.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LTCN and ILS.

Drawdown Indicators

	LTCN	ILS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.58%	-2.46%	-97.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-72.73%	-0.55%	-72.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-93.68%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-93.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.37%	0.00%	-99.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-89.84%	-0.50%	-89.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	50.94%	0.15%	+50.79%

Volatility

LTCN vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison

Grayscale Litecoin Trust (LTCN) has a higher volatility of 10.41% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 0.42%. This indicates that LTCN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LTCN	ILS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.41%	0.42%	+9.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.88%	1.47%	+38.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	64.82%	2.47%	+62.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	99.11%	3.64%	+95.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	140.36%	3.64%	+136.72%

LTCN vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

LTCN has a 2.50% expense ratio, which is higher than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

LTCN vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison

LTCN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.13%.

Position	TTM	2025
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.13%	6.06%
LTCN Grayscale Litecoin Trust	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LTCN and ILS in my portfolio?

LTCN and ILS have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LTCN or ILS?

LTCN has higher volatility (10.41%) compared to ILS (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LTCN dropped -99.58% vs ILS's -2.46%.

Which ETF is better, LTCN or ILS?

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.79% vs -62.06% for LTCN. On fees, ILS is cheaper at 1.58% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LTCN or ILS?

Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.79% return vs -62.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LTCN or ILS?

ILS is cheaper with a 1.58% expense ratio, compared with 2.50% for LTCN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LTCN or ILS?

ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.13%, compared with 0.00% for LTCN.

What is the main difference between LTCN and ILS?

LTCN is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Grayscale and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 2.50% for LTCN and 1.58% for ILS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs -0.96), 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.