MOTO vs. CRTC

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

MOTO (SmartETFs Smart Transportation & Technology ETF) and CRTC (Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. MOTO is actively managed, while CRTC is passively managed. Over the past year, MOTO returned 34.06% vs 17.24% for CRTC. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MOTO charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CRTC.

Performance

MOTO vs. CRTC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SmartETFs Smart Transportation & Technology ETF (MOTO) and Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MOTO achieves a 17.24% return, which is significantly higher than CRTC's 9.47% return.

MOTO

• 1D: 1.41%
• 1M: -0.75%
• 6M: 9.06%
• YTD: 17.24%
• 1Y: 34.06%
• 3Y*: 14.56%
• 5Y*: 7.58%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.32%

CRTC

• 1D: 2.36%
• 1M: 3.10%
• 6M: 7.08%
• YTD: 9.47%
• 1Y: 17.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 20.10%

*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)
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	$249.56K	$623.71K	$501.58K
MOTO SmartETFs Smart Transportation & Technology ETF	$14.22K	$15.41K	$15.45K

MOTO vs. CRTC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MOTO SmartETFs Smart Transportation & Technology ETF	17.24%	27.38%	2.01%	8.70%
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	9.47%	18.69%	18.05%	7.16%

Correlation

The correlation between MOTO and CRTC is 0.78, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2023	0.79

The correlation between MOTO and CRTC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

MOTO vs. CRTC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MOTO	CRTC
Technology	43.0%	39.6%
Consumer Cyclical	23.7%	4.9%
Industrials	15.3%	13.4%
Communication Services	4.4%	14.0%
Basic Materials	3.8%	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	0.0%
Financial Services	1.0%	0.1%
Utilities	0.7%	5.5%
Energy	-	5.8%
Healthcare	-	13.5%
Real Estate	-	0.1%

Return for Risk

MOTO vs. CRTC — Risk / Return Rank

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

MOTO

MOTO Risk / Return Rank: 54
MOTO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
MOTO Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
MOTO Omega Ratio Rank: 53
MOTO Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
MOTO Martin Ratio Rank: 52

CRTC

CRTC Risk / Return Rank: 47
CRTC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
CRTC Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
CRTC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
CRTC Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
CRTC Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

MOTO vs. CRTC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SmartETFs Smart Transportation & Technology ETF (MOTO) and Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC). 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.

	MOTO	CRTC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	1.24	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.93	1.73	+0.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.22	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.13	1.91	+0.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.46	6.01	+0.45

MOTO vs. CRTC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MOTO Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is comparable to the CRTC Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MOTO and CRTC, 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

MOTO vs. CRTC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MOTO drawdown since its inception was -38.24%, which is greater than CRTC's maximum drawdown of -19.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOTO and CRTC.

Drawdown Indicators

	MOTO	CRTC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.24%	-19.07%	-19.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.07%	-9.05%	-7.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.43%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.34%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.85%	-0.47%	-10.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.94%	-2.23%	-7.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.29%	2.88%	+2.41%

Volatility

MOTO vs. CRTC - Volatility Comparison

SmartETFs Smart Transportation & Technology ETF (MOTO) has a higher volatility of 8.50% compared to Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC) at 4.30%. This indicates that MOTO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRTC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MOTO	CRTC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.50%	4.30%	+4.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.79%	11.00%	+9.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.52%	14.04%	+10.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.25%	15.82%	+8.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.51%	15.82%	+10.69%

MOTO vs. CRTC - Expense Ratio Comparison

MOTO has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than CRTC's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

MOTO vs. CRTC - Dividend Comparison

MOTO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, more than CRTC's 0.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	0.87%	1.03%	1.13%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MOTO SmartETFs Smart Transportation & Technology ETF	0.90%	1.06%	1.07%	2.73%	2.33%	0.55%	2.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MOTO and CRTC in my portfolio?

MOTO and CRTC have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MOTO or CRTC?

MOTO has higher volatility (8.50%) compared to CRTC (4.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOTO dropped -38.24% vs CRTC's -19.07%.

Which ETF is better, MOTO or CRTC?

On 1-year performance, MOTO leads with 34.06% vs 17.24% for CRTC. On fees, CRTC is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CRTC has been the lower-risk option at 4.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MOTO or CRTC?

Over the 1-year period, MOTO has performed better with a 34.06% return vs 17.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MOTO or CRTC?

CRTC is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for MOTO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MOTO or CRTC?

MOTO has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.87% for CRTC.

What is the main difference between MOTO and CRTC?

They also come from different issuers: Guinness Atkinson and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for MOTO and 0.35% for CRTC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MOTO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 1.24), 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.