PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MBCE vs. LRNZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MBCE vs. LRNZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Monarch Blue Chips Elite Index ETF (MBCE) and TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


MBCE

1D
1.38%
1M
0.54%
6M
YTD
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

LRNZ

1D
2.65%
1M
6M
YTD
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MBCE vs. LRNZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between MBCE and LRNZ is 1.00 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2026

1.00

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

MBCE vs. LRNZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Monarch Blue Chips Elite Index ETF (MBCE) and TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ). 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

MBCE vs. LRNZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MBCE vs. LRNZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MBCE drawdown since its inception was -7.15%, which is greater than LRNZ's maximum drawdown of -3.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBCE and LRNZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MBCELRNZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.15%

-3.01%

-4.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.70%

-0.44%

-5.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.47%

-1.39%

-2.08%

Volatility

MBCE vs. LRNZ - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MBCELRNZDifference

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

42.90%

40.19%

+2.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

42.90%

40.19%

+2.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

42.90%

40.19%

+2.71%

MBCE vs. LRNZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

MBCE has a 1.14% expense ratio, which is higher than LRNZ's 0.68% expense ratio.


Dividends

MBCE vs. LRNZ - Dividend Comparison

Neither MBCE nor LRNZ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 1.00, MBCE and LRNZ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, LRNZ is cheaper at 0.68% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LRNZ is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 1.14% for MBCE.

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

They also come from different issuers: Kingsview Partners LLC and TrueMark Investments. Their fees differ too: 1.14% for MBCE and 0.68% for LRNZ.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MBCE and LRNZ

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