MOO vs. LIT

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

MOO (VanEck Agribusiness ETF) and LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MOO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Agribusiness Index, while LIT is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Lithium Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MOO returned 7.09%/yr vs 14.53%/yr for LIT. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MOO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LIT.

Performance

MOO vs. LIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MOO achieves a 7.97% return, which is significantly lower than LIT's 27.00% return. Over the past 10 years, MOO has underperformed LIT with an annualized return of 7.09%, while LIT has yielded a comparatively higher 14.53% annualized return.

MOO

• 1D: 0.85%
• 1M: -4.12%
• YTD: 7.97%
• 6M: 8.15%
• 1Y: 8.56%
• 3Y*: 1.51%
• 5Y*: -0.93%
• 10Y*: 7.09%

LIT

• 1D: 2.02%
• 1M: -5.27%
• YTD: 27.00%
• 6M: 29.31%
• 1Y: 124.44%
• 3Y*: 9.00%
• 5Y*: 4.01%
• 10Y*: 14.53%

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

MOO vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	7.97%	15.61%	-12.43%	-8.57%	-8.10%	23.99%	14.59%	22.29%	-6.03%	21.75%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	27.00%	60.05%	-19.19%	-12.18%	-29.91%	36.74%	127.88%	3.27%	-28.63%	64.19%

Correlation

The correlation between MOO and LIT is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.51
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2010	0.64

Over the past year, the correlation between MOO and LIT has dropped to 0.34 - well below their long-term average of 0.64, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MOO vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MOO	LIT
Consumer Defensive	36.8%	-
Basic Materials	25.5%	55.4%
Industrials	20.9%	26.0%
Healthcare	16.8%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	7.0%
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	11.5%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MOO vs. LIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

MOO

MOO Risk / Return Rank: 21
MOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Omega Ratio Rank: 20
MOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
MOO Martin Ratio Rank: 22

LIT

LIT Risk / Return Rank: 94
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 91
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

MOO vs. LIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). 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.

	MOO	LIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.64	3.57	-2.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.00	3.94	-2.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.52	-0.40
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.87	7.36	-6.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.42	27.27	-24.84

MOO vs. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MOO Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is lower than the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 3.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MOO and LIT, 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

MOO vs. LIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MOO drawdown since its inception was -69.53%, which is greater than LIT's maximum drawdown of -65.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOO and LIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MOO	LIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-69.53%	-65.91%	-3.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.38%	-16.46%	+6.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.83%	-53.01%	+26.18%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.52%	-65.91%	+26.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.52%	-65.91%	+26.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.10%	-11.21%	-7.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.97%	-33.59%	+16.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.70%	4.45%	-0.75%

Volatility

MOO vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) is 3.50%, while Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a volatility of 11.56%. This indicates that MOO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MOO	LIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.50%	11.56%	-8.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.85%	23.80%	-12.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.16%	33.94%	-19.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.15%	32.04%	-14.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.19%	30.77%	-12.58%

MOO vs. LIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

MOO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than LIT's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MOO vs. LIT - Dividend Comparison

MOO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.29%, more than LIT's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	0.38%	0.49%	0.93%	1.11%	0.99%	0.22%	0.40%	1.85%	2.52%	3.26%	2.15%	0.24%
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	2.29%	2.47%	3.41%	2.93%	2.15%	1.17%	1.10%	1.26%	1.69%	1.44%	2.14%	2.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MOO and LIT in my portfolio?

MOO and LIT have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MOO or LIT?

LIT has higher volatility (11.56%) compared to MOO (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOO dropped -69.53% vs LIT's -65.91%.

Which ETF is better, MOO or LIT?

On 10-year performance, LIT leads with 14.53% vs 7.09% for MOO. On fees, MOO is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, MOO has been the lower-risk option at 3.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MOO or LIT?

Over the 10-year period, LIT has performed better with a 14.53% return vs 7.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MOO or LIT?

MOO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MOO or LIT?

MOO has the higher dividend yield at 2.29%, compared with 0.38% for LIT.

What is the main difference between MOO and LIT?

MOO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while LIT is Commodity Producers Equities. MOO tracks MVIS Global Agribusiness Index, while LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for MOO and 0.75% for LIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.57 vs 0.64), 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.