PLTI.L vs. SMFG

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

PLTI.L (IncomeShares Palantir (PLTR) Options ETP) is Derivative Income fund actively managed by Leverage Shares, while SMFG (Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc.) is a stock. Over the past year, PLTI.L returned -35.42% vs 77.13% for SMFG. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

PLTI.L vs. SMFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in IncomeShares Palantir (PLTR) Options ETP (PLTI.L) and Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. (SMFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PLTI.L achieves a -33.06% return, which is significantly lower than SMFG's 30.77% return.

PLTI.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -8.63%
• 6M: -32.21%
• YTD: -33.06%
• 1Y: -35.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6,217.92%

SMFG

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: -1.35%
• 6M: 18.62%
• YTD: 30.77%
• 1Y: 77.13%
• 3Y*: 45.59%
• 5Y*: 33.59%
• 10Y*: 19.47%
• ALL TIME*: 3.65%

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

PLTI.L vs. SMFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PLTI.L IncomeShares Palantir (PLTR) Options ETP	-33.06%	10,807.19%
SMFG Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc.	30.77%	28.80%

Correlation

The correlation between PLTI.L and SMFG is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 7, 2025	0.11

Return for Risk

PLTI.L vs. SMFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PLTI.L

PLTI.L Risk / Return Rank: 5
PLTI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
PLTI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
PLTI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5
PLTI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
PLTI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5

SMFG

SMFG Risk / Return Rank: 93
SMFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
SMFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
SMFG Omega Ratio Rank: 93
SMFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
SMFG Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

PLTI.L vs. SMFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IncomeShares Palantir (PLTR) Options ETP (PLTI.L) and Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. (SMFG). 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.

	PLTI.L	SMFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.57	2.65	-3.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.60	3.39	-3.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.42	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.60	3.85	-4.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.92	11.41	-12.33

PLTI.L vs. SMFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PLTI.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.57, which is lower than the SMFG Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PLTI.L and SMFG, 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

PLTI.L vs. SMFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PLTI.L drawdown since its inception was -59.14%, smaller than the maximum SMFG drawdown of -77.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PLTI.L and SMFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PLTI.L	SMFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.14%	-77.26%	+18.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-59.14%	-20.12%	-39.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-25.67%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.88%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-47.66%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-55.25%	-6.08%	-49.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.04%	-47.80%	+14.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	38.56%	6.78%	+31.78%

Volatility

PLTI.L vs. SMFG - Volatility Comparison

IncomeShares Palantir (PLTR) Options ETP (PLTI.L) has a higher volatility of 13.53% compared to Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. (SMFG) at 9.02%. This indicates that PLTI.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SMFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PLTI.L	SMFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.53%	9.02%	+4.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.69%	22.65%	+10.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	62.73%	29.34%	+33.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9,849.70%	28.97%	+9,820.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9,849.70%	26.84%	+9,822.86%

Dividends

PLTI.L vs. SMFG - Dividend Comparison

PLTI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 58.06%, more than SMFG's 2.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PLTI.L IncomeShares Palantir (PLTR) Options ETP	58.06%	11.63%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SMFG Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc.	2.38%	2.84%	2.82%	3.67%	2.12%	0.00%	5.97%	4.61%	4.80%	3.17%	3.63%	3.32%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PLTI.L and SMFG in my portfolio?

PLTI.L and SMFG have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.